test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

My problems with TRIBBLE

18911131417

Comments

  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,246 Arc User
    edited August 2018
    > @valoreah said:
    > I don't see what's the big deal with the computer allowing Burnham to exit the brig. I don't see Starfleet as being the "let the folk in the brig die" kind of organization.
    >
    > Seems to me the system would have fail safes built in to allow for stuff like massive hull breaches etc. The ship was under attack with most of the brig totally destroyed and open to space. I also seem to recall the alert saying power failure to the brig force field was imminent. Makes sense the AI would allow for exit under those circumstances.

    Except the fact the AI should of let her out only to get her to an escape old, not let her wander freely about.

    I look at it this way. Burnham should of NEVER EVER had voice communication with the computer.

    Now abandon ship gets announced by the surviving senior officer or captain. Computer does a check, still has a prisoner in the brig.

    Computer notifies senior officer. Senior officer can either send someone or instruct the computer to deal with it.

    Computer is elected to get the prisoner off the ship. Finds nearest escape pod and directs the prisoner to it. Any attempt to deviate is met with security fields until prisoner gets on track to the pod.

    Get prisoner on the pod. If it already has people aboard computer notifies senior officer on the pod, person is armed a d takes control of prisoner waits for rescue. If pod is only inhabited by the prisoner, locked down to only essential needs to preserve life, ZERO computer control till rescue.

    Now we have positive control over a prisoner awaiting court marshal.

    This is how you properly secure prisoners while abandoning ship. And all it takes is a few sub routines.

    So enough with this "oh we have to let them go to save them." TRIBBLE. No. You don't.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 15,058 Arc User
    talonxv wrote: »
    > @valoreah said:
    > I don't see what's the big deal with the computer allowing Burnham to exit the brig. I don't see Starfleet as being the "let the folk in the brig die" kind of organization.
    >
    > Seems to me the system would have fail safes built in to allow for stuff like massive hull breaches etc. The ship was under attack with most of the brig totally destroyed and open to space. I also seem to recall the alert saying power failure to the brig force field was imminent. Makes sense the AI would allow for exit under those circumstances.

    Except the fact the AI should of let her out only to get her to an escape old, not let her wander freely about.

    I look at it this way. Burnham should of NEVER EVER had voice communication with the computer.

    Now abandon ship gets announced by the surviving senior officer or captain. Computer does a check, still has a prisoner in the brig.

    Computer notifies senior officer. Senior officer can either send someone or instruct the computer to deal with it.

    Computer is elected to get the prisoner off the ship. Finds nearest escape pod and directs the prisoner to it. Any attempt to deviate is met with security fields until prisoner gets on track to the pod.

    Get prisoner on the pod. If it already has people aboard computer notifies senior officer on the pod, person is armed a d takes control of prisoner waits for rescue. If pod is only inhabited by the prisoner, locked down to only essential needs to preserve life, ZERO computer control till rescue.

    Now we have positive control over a prisoner awaiting court marshal.

    This is how you properly secure prisoners while abandoning ship. And all it takes is a few sub routines.

    So enough with this "oh we have to let them go to save them." ****. No. You don't.

    Okay - I will actually concede that it was a little convienient that she was allowed free reign of the ship once she was out. I guess one could argue that everything and everyone was preoccupied with damage control, but that's just speculation.

    However, some aspects of the scenario you suggest wouldn't work.
    Firstly, no abandon ship order was given by that point.
    Secondly, there was nothing much actually left of the brig - just a gaping hole to open space and what was left of Burnham's cell.
    Unless they sent someone in an enviroment suit with a thruster pack (hardly the best use of someone's time with the ship blowing up around them) they'd open that door to be blown out into space.
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,843 Arc User
    talonxv wrote: »
    Except the fact the AI should of let her out only to get her to an escape old, not let her wander freely about.

    You're right. Everyone should have dropped everything they were doing and asked the Klingons nicely to wait a few minutes and stop attacking them just to make sure Burnham was relocated to another secured location.

    Give me a break.

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,246 Arc User
    > @valoreah said:
    > talonxv wrote: »
    >
    > Except the fact the AI should of let her out only to get her to an escape old, not let her wander freely about.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > You're right. Everyone should have dropped everything they were doing and asked the Klingons nicely to wait a few minutes and stop attacking them just to make sure Burnham was relocated to another secured location.
    >
    > Give me a break.

    It does not take an entire crew even under a battle to move 1 prisoner. Takes 1 to 2 people out of what 2-300? So yeah gimmie a break.

    > @reyan01 said:
    > talonxv wrote: »
    >
    > > @valoreah said:
    > > I don't see what's the big deal with the computer allowing Burnham to exit the brig. I don't see Starfleet as being the "let the folk in the brig die" kind of organization.
    > >
    > > Seems to me the system would have fail safes built in to allow for stuff like massive hull breaches etc. The ship was under attack with most of the brig totally destroyed and open to space. I also seem to recall the alert saying power failure to the brig force field was imminent. Makes sense the AI would allow for exit under those circumstances.
    >
    > Except the fact the AI should of let her out only to get her to an escape old, not let her wander freely about.
    >
    > I look at it this way. Burnham should of NEVER EVER had voice communication with the computer.
    >
    > Now abandon ship gets announced by the surviving senior officer or captain. Computer does a check, still has a prisoner in the brig.
    >
    > Computer notifies senior officer. Senior officer can either send someone or instruct the computer to deal with it.
    >
    > Computer is elected to get the prisoner off the ship. Finds nearest escape pod and directs the prisoner to it. Any attempt to deviate is met with security fields until prisoner gets on track to the pod.
    >
    > Get prisoner on the pod. If it already has people aboard computer notifies senior officer on the pod, person is armed a d takes control of prisoner waits for rescue. If pod is only inhabited by the prisoner, locked down to only essential needs to preserve life, ZERO computer control till rescue.
    >
    > Now we have positive control over a prisoner awaiting court marshal.
    >
    > This is how you properly secure prisoners while abandoning ship. And all it takes is a few sub routines.
    >
    > So enough with this "oh we have to let them go to save them." ****. No. You don't.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Okay - I will actually concede that it was a little convienient that she was allowed free reign of the ship once she was out. I guess one could argue that everything and everyone was preoccupied with damage control, but that's just speculation.
    >
    > However, some aspects of the scenario you suggest wouldn't work.
    > Firstly, no abandon ship order was given by that point.
    > Secondly, there was nothing much actually left of the brig - just a gaping hole to open space and what was left of Burnham's cell.
    > Unless they sent someone in an enviroment suit with a thruster pack (hardly the best use of someone's time with the ship blowing up around them) they'd open that door to be blown out into space.

    Outside of VERY few circunstance there is ZERO reason for Burnham to be let loose. ZERO. And when she is, she MUST be under escort.

    I don't care how you phrase it guys, this is a SERIOUS breech of security onboard a ship. Captains of ships have been relieved of command for less. No ifs, ands or buts about it.

    The only circunstances i can see to let her out are as follows:
    Warp core breach
    Loss of all ship power
    Abandon ship

    If the ship is still under command of someone and still operation her behind stays in the BRIG with zero computer access.

    PERIOD.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,843 Arc User
    edited August 2018
    talonxv wrote: »
    It does not take an entire crew even under a battle to move 1 prisoner. Takes 1 to 2 people out of what 2-300? So yeah gimmie a break.

    Going to go out a limb and say that the crew had more important things to worry about at the time... their attention was focused where it should have been.

    Silliness like this is nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking.
    talonxv wrote: »
    I don't care how you phrase it guys, this is a SERIOUS breech of security onboard a ship. Captains of ships have been relieved of command for less.

    Name one Captain who was relieved for this from official Trek canon.
    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 35,927 Arc User
    You realise this is the same Starfleet which programmes its computers to accept a Captain's authorisation code and voiceprint from the Bridge even though said Captain isn't even on the bridge, right? And which allowed the ship's command codes to be locked out with said authorisation from a location said Captain wasn't even at?!

    Also, I seem to recall Paris being allowed computer access when he was brigged, and he was supposedly under 'solitary confinement'.
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,949 Arc User
    > @valoreah said:
    > talonxv wrote: »
    >
    > It does not take an entire crew even under a battle to move 1 prisoner. Takes 1 to 2 people out of what 2-300? So yeah gimmie a break.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Going to go out a limb and say that the crew had more important things to worry about at the time... their attention was focused where it should have been.
    >
    > Silliness like this is nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking.

    THANK YOU! Like I said before: damage control is EVERYONE'S job, not just dedicated duty officers' (they only MANAGE damage control).
    "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"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,246 Arc User
    > @ryan218 said:
    > You realise this is the same Starfleet which programmes its computers to accept a Captain's authorisation code and voiceprint from the Bridge even though said Captain isn't even on the bridge, right? And which allowed the ship's command codes to be locked out with said authorisation from a location said Captain wasn't even at?!
    >
    > Also, I seem to recall Paris being allowed computer access when he was brigged, and he was supposedly under 'solitary confinement'.

    Yes I do and these are major breeches in security.

    But another fun fact. When you get sent to the brig awaiting trial, guess what, the brig is now your appointed place of duty. Yes that's the way it works in any military or military like service. Even in the Coast Guard.

    So for Burnham to leave the brig, that's abandoning her appointed place of duty. At a minimum that under the UCMJ is article 89, Unauthorized Absence. At worst desertion of your post in the face of the enemy, which along with Mutiny is a capital crime.

    A few other crimes could be tossed on Burnham. Let's run them shall we?

    Unauthorized use of a computer to circumvent security
    Disobeying a Lawful order for the what 2nd or 3rd time?
    Conduct unbecoming
    Unauthorized Absence
    And possibly desertion(a damn good case can be made here).

    And yet many keep trying to say Burnham did nothing wrong leaving the brig?

    Wrong. I mean seriously, this kind of mentality that she was in the right for humanitarian reasons is hand wringing at best and asinine at worst.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,843 Arc User
    talonxv wrote: »
    But another fun fact. When you get sent to the brig awaiting trial, guess what, the brig is now your appointed place of duty. Yes that's the way it works in any military or military like service. Even in the Coast Guard.

    Another fun fact - Star Trek isn't real.

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,949 Arc User
    edited August 2018
    > @talonxv said:
    > > @ryan218 said:
    > > You realise this is the same Starfleet which programmes its computers to accept a Captain's authorisation code and voiceprint from the Bridge even though said Captain isn't even on the bridge, right? And which allowed the ship's command codes to be locked out with said authorisation from a location said Captain wasn't even at?!
    > >
    > > Also, I seem to recall Paris being allowed computer access when he was brigged, and he was supposedly under 'solitary confinement'.
    >
    > Yes I do and these are major breeches in security.
    >
    > But another fun fact. When you get sent to the brig awaiting trial, guess what, the brig is now your appointed place of duty. Yes that's the way it works in any military or military like service. Even in the Coast Guard.
    >
    > So for Burnham to leave the brig, that's abandoning her appointed place of duty. At a minimum that under the UCMJ is article 89, Unauthorized Absence. At worst desertion of your post in the face of the enemy, which along with Mutiny is a capital crime.
    >
    > A few other crimes could be tossed on Burnham. Let's run them shall we?
    >
    > Unauthorized use of a computer to circumvent security
    > Disobeying a Lawful order for the what 2nd or 3rd time?
    > Conduct unbecoming
    > Unauthorized Absence
    > And possibly desertion(a damn good case can be made here).
    >
    > And yet many keep trying to say Burnham did nothing wrong leaving the brig?
    >
    > Wrong. I mean seriously, this kind of mentality that she was in the right for humanitarian reasons is hand wringing at best and asinine at worst.

    Say the brig HADN'T been about to explosively decompress, killing her. (Which it WAS.) It's not desertion, either: you actually want UCMJ Article 95, resisting arrest and escaping from custody. (And does that even count if you then immediately report to the officer who arrested you in the first place? Hmm.)

    In the situation as it stood, however: any halfway decent court is going to make allowances for extenuating circumstances, such as "I'M LITERALLY GOING TO EFFING DIE OF ASPHYXIATION IF I DON'T GET OUT OF HERE RIGHT THE HELL NOW!"
    "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"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 10,589 Arc User
    We don't know Starfleet's regulation. Everything posted here in regards to US military laws is completely irrelevant. And again, the brig was gone. Physically gone. Only held by a forcefield that was about to collapse. She didn't use anything unauthorized, she asked the computer to please not let it die which it found a reasonable request. This is now literally grasping straws just to find SOMETHING to hate on DSC it gets ridiculous. I mean (wrongly) quoting some RL laws that don't apply in the first place to proof the show blows? Come the oink on.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,949 Arc User
    > @angrytarg said:
    > We don't know Starfleet's regulation. Everything posted here in regards to US military laws is completely irrelevant. And again, the brig was gone. Physically gone. Only held by a forcefield that was about to collapse. She didn't use anything unauthorized, she asked the computer to please not let it die which it found a reasonable request. This is now literally grasping straws just to find SOMETHING to hate on DSC it gets ridiculous. I mean (wrongly) quoting some RL laws that don't apply in the first place to proof the show blows? Come the oink on.

    This verges on an appeal to ignorance fallacy, Targ. Military forces tend to have ROUGHLY the same rules (at least among humans; I wouldn't try to apply this argument to the Klingons or Romulans, for example). Given that Starfleet is usually written similarly to the US Navy, the UCMJ is a decent substitute for laws or charges that haven't been explicitly cited in canon.

    Doesn't hurt that one real-life law, the Fourth Geneva Convention, WAS cited explicitly in DSC (though they apparently missed the part where mining a corpse violates the Convention, too).
    "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"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,450 Bug Hunter
    angrytarg wrote: »
    We don't know Starfleet's regulation. Everything posted here in regards to US military laws is completely irrelevant. And again, the brig was gone. Physically gone. Only held by a forcefield that was about to collapse. She didn't use anything unauthorized, she asked the computer to please not let it die which it found a reasonable request. This is now literally grasping straws just to find SOMETHING to hate on DSC it gets ridiculous. I mean (wrongly) quoting some RL laws that don't apply in the first place to proof the show blows? Come the oink on.

    Mainly this.

    Implying Burnham was in dereliction of duty for escaping the brig rather than dying if this had happened to be a 21st century US soldier operating in a US theatre of operation onboard a US naval vessel means people are still just making things up to complain about.

    The computer was clearly designed to not let prisoners die. Starfleet is not in the happit of even allowing people into situations where that might be an option (unless your TNG S1 Picard then he'd happily pull the trigger himself for the greater good). And even modern organisation in the civilised world recognise (or at least pay lip service to) the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
    starswordc wrote: »
    Military forces tend to have ROUGHLY the same rules (at least among humans; I wouldn't try to apply this argument to the Klingons or Romulans, for example).

    There's your problem right there. Starfleet's not a military. It's organised along paramilitary styles. That's to allow the writers to pick which parts of various organisations from across history they want to use without tiresome pendants moaning their stripes are two centimeters to high and they shouldn't be wearing that type of hat on a tuesday.

    (Obviously that goes without saying it dosn't stop tiresome pendants moaning that those division patches are only to be worn on the uniforms of a certain series and that crew members working in the galley are Operations not Engineering.)

    All those silly nitpicks that people have that Starfleet dosn't work like their favourite military? Those are features not bugs. It's because Starfleet operates differently.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    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!
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,949 Arc User
    edited August 2018
    artan42 wrote: »
    starswordc wrote: »
    Military forces tend to have ROUGHLY the same rules (at least among humans; I wouldn't try to apply this argument to the Klingons or Romulans, for example).

    There's your problem right there. Starfleet's not a military. It's organised along paramilitary styles. That's to allow the writers to pick which parts of various organisations from across history they want to use without tiresome pendants moaning their stripes are two centimeters to high and they shouldn't be wearing that type of hat on a tuesday.

    (Obviously that goes without saying it dosn't stop tiresome pendants moaning that those division patches are only to be worn on the uniforms of a certain series and that crew members working in the galley are Operations not Engineering.)

    All those silly nitpicks that people have that Starfleet dosn't work like their favourite military? Those are features not bugs. It's because Starfleet operates differently.​​

    Starfleet fulfills all the primary functions of a military service plus a few extras, is organized in a military-style structure, and is equipped as a matter of course with armament and legal authorization sufficient to glass an inhabited planet. That is enough information for one to accurately describe them as a military force. And I'm not going through this garbage argument again.

    That's quite apart from the context you conveniently removed from your quotation, which is that I was disputing @talonxv's assertion of what laws Burnham supposedly broke by trying to save her own life at the expense of giving the ship's computer a word I can't say on this forum. The point was, if you're going to cite real-life laws to argue Star Trek (which is indeed a somewhat dubious proposition), at least cite the right real life laws. :p
    "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"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 9,483 Arc User
    Under the UCMJ, Burnham would have been under arrest for violation of Article 94, Mutiny or Sedition (as well as Article 90, Assaulting a Superior Officer, but that would probably be regarded in a court martial as being subsumed by the Article 94 violation - if the court felt her Article 94 violation justified, though, they might change the charges down to a 90). She hasn't been tried yet, so she wouldn't be regarded as guilty. If she turned herself over to appropriate authorities after escaping the brig to save her life, she wouldn't get an Article 95 (Resistance, Flight, Breach of Arrest, and Escape) piled on there, due to extenuating circumstances. (On the other hand, if she, say, tried to make her way to a shuttle to effect an escape, that would add Article 95 charges on there.)

    There can be no Dereliction of Duty (Article 92) when one has been relieved of duty, which is part of the arrest procedure, so no violation there. And since all of these fall under what are called the "punitive articles", none of them are subject to an Article 15 (Non-Judicial Punishment). If the captain of a ship feels that a court martial is not called for, he or she can decide not to charge a suspect with a punitive violation; however, the suspect can force the issue. (For an example of this in fiction, I refer you to chapter 5 of Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers, when Hendrick is being charged with failure to obey an order to "freeze", but insists on mentioning to the colonel that he got up and punched the DI. The fact that he did this while his testimony was being taken and recorded for non-judicial punishment meant that the colonel had no choice - it had to go to court martial at that point.)
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 35,927 Arc User
    Let's also bare in mind that United Earth (the organisation Starfleet supposedly answers to) clearly subscribes to many of the humanitarian laws of our world, including a little thing called the United Nations Convention on Human Rights (it also stands to reason that the European Hegemony would maintain the European Convention on Human Rights). Now, I'm not well versed on the UNHCR, but the ECHR specifically gives prisoners the right to life if their life is threatened (I.e. It is illegal to prevent a prisoner escaping death, assuming of course that death has not been legally sanctioned). If Starfleet regulations (and the Starfleet JAG) prohibited Burnham from seeking escape from a clearly fatal situation, and she died as a result, that would make Starfleet legally responsible for her death.

    Yes, you read that right, under our own laws any military (in the ECHR at least) that enforced the regulations talon just cited against a prisoner in a burning brig would be violating that prisoner's basic human rights. Burnham had every right to ask the computer (the only figure of authority she had immediate access to) to facilitate her escape from a situation which would otherwise result in her certain death.

    And as I've pointed out, Paris had the same computer access when he was brigged. No, this isn't an 'it's okay because everyone's doing it', it's an 'it's established in canon as Starfleet practice even a century after DSC takes place'. Tuvok even mentions in an episode that the Voyager's computer is programmed to automatically release prisoners if the Brig becomes uninhabitable, which is exactly what Shenzhou's computer did, once it was given a safe method to do so.

    You can't condemn DSC for violating canon and then condemn it for being stupid when it does, even if it's following canon accidentally.
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 35,927 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    azrael605 wrote: »
    > @talonxv said:
    > > @valoreah said:
    > > I don't see what's the big deal with the computer allowing Burnham to exit the brig. I don't see Starfleet as being the "let the folk in the brig die" kind of organization.
    > >
    > > Seems to me the system would have fail safes built in to allow for stuff like massive hull breaches etc. The ship was under attack with most of the brig totally destroyed and open to space. I also seem to recall the alert saying power failure to the brig force field was imminent. Makes sense the AI would allow for exit under those circumstances.
    >
    > Except the fact the AI should of let her out only to get her to an escape old, not let her wander freely about.
    >
    > I look at it this way. Burnham should of NEVER EVER had voice communication with the computer.
    >
    > Now abandon ship gets announced by the surviving senior officer or captain. Computer does a check, still has a prisoner in the brig.
    >
    > Computer notifies senior officer. Senior officer can either send someone or instruct the computer to deal with it.
    >
    > Computer is elected to get the prisoner off the ship. Finds nearest escape pod and directs the prisoner to it. Any attempt to deviate is met with security fields until prisoner gets on track to the pod.
    >
    > Get prisoner on the pod. If it already has people aboard computer notifies senior officer on the pod, person is armed a d takes control of prisoner waits for rescue. If pod is only inhabited by the prisoner, locked down to only essential needs to preserve life, ZERO computer control till rescue.
    >
    > Now we have positive control over a prisoner awaiting court marshal.
    >
    > This is how you properly secure prisoners while abandoning ship. And all it takes is a few sub routines.
    >
    > So enough with this "oh we have to let them go to save them." ****. No. You don't.

    So when Lon Suter was able to exit his confinment due to battle damage which lead to him being the person who saved Voyager at the cost of his own life The Doctor should have locked him back up instead of utilizing his talents to save the ship?

    "Everybody's doing it" isn't an excuse for bad writing, and Voyager had some real stinkers in terms of contrived situations and unlikely outcomes.

    Again:
    ryan218 wrote: »
    No, this isn't an 'it's okay because everyone's doing it', it's an 'it's established in canon as Starfleet practice even a century after DSC takes place'.

  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,503 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,

    It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 9,483 Arc User
    starkaos wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,

    It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
    In fact, Poul Anderson wrote a few novels on this basis. The aliens enslaved primitive warriors; the warriors slew them and took over their starships. Fortunately, the craft were largely self-sustaining, so this led to such scenes as an interstellar craft touching down, a ramp lowering, and swordsmen riding their horses into battle.

    I know you don't care for large parts of the Trek canon, Patrick, but unlike what yourself and your collaborators have done with the Masterverse tales, writers for the shows have to work with the universe they're given. The only "Roddenberry Rule" that was suspended was the one Gene came up with for TNG, in which interpersonal conflict between crewmembers was not allowed. So "it's how this is done in canon" is not an "everybody does it" defense, it's consistency between sources. You may well disagree with how the sources do things, but it is what it is.
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,503 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    starkaos wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,

    It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
    In fact, Poul Anderson wrote a few novels on this basis. The aliens enslaved primitive warriors; the warriors slew them and took over their starships. Fortunately, the craft were largely self-sustaining, so this led to such scenes as an interstellar craft touching down, a ramp lowering, and swordsmen riding their horses into battle.

    Kzinti from Larry Niven's novels obtained their technology in this manner, but they seemed to be far more successful than the Kazon. The main difference between the two was the Kzinti were trained as mercenaries while the Kazon were slaves.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    starkaos wrote: »
    jonsills wrote: »
    starkaos wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,
    It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
    In fact, Poul Anderson wrote a few novels on this basis. The aliens enslaved primitive warriors; the warriors slew them and took over their starships. Fortunately, the craft were largely self-sustaining, so this led to such scenes as an interstellar craft touching down, a ramp lowering, and swordsmen riding their horses into battle.
    Kzinti from Larry Niven's novels obtained their technology in this manner, but they seemed to be far more successful than the Kazon. The main difference between the two was the Kzinti were trained as mercenaries while the Kazon were slaves.
    Part of it is how long the race has been working on reverse engineering and understanding the tech. Also… not all Kazon sects lacked the tech to make water. but the ones who did have it didn't want to share, and were more interested in selling water.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.