It's a poor writer who needs his characters to exposit on every single incident from their history, even when it's not germane to the current plot, after all.
Heh, it's part of why I laugh at people who reject "word-of-god" as canon. You can't explain every single background detail on-screen.
Oh that is adorably cute.
Rumours not based on any.. facts.. at all.. in a video by a guy who dosn't like Discovery. Because clearly the whole "Omg Discovery is killing Trek" bullcrap hasn't gotten tiresome at all. But silly me I can't find a sarcasm tag large enough for this post.
I'd say something like "One day toxic fans will learn they don't own a franchise, they're just the consumer. Not the dictator." But lord what an idiot I am, toxic fans don't understand the most basic of Human intellectual capacities. Hence the word "Toxic". Lovely.
Oh that is adorably cute.
Rumours not based on any.. facts.. at all.. in a video by a guy who dosn't like Discovery. Because clearly the whole "Omg Discovery is killing Trek" bullcrap hasn't gotten tiresome at all. But silly me I can't find a sarcasm tag large enough for this post.
I'd say something like "One day toxic fans will learn they don't own a franchise, they're just the consumer. Not the dictator." But lord what an idiot I am, toxic fans don't understand the most basic of Human intellectual capacities. Hence the word "Toxic". Lovely.
While you make a valid point, one must remember that in recent years the companies that own these franchises have a bad habit of making new installments for non-existent markets, instead of putting a good deal of focus on what has traditionally been their "bread and butter". If these franchise owners were smart, they would clean house in their marketing departments. Because the suits don't know jack about a given fandom, just the bottom line. And it's the fandoms that the money tends to flow from, not the average person on the street.
Actually what these companies have been doing is correct. The big bucks doesn’t come in appealing to just the fan base. The real money comes in appealing to everyone. Marvel doesn’t make movies just for the people who buy comics regularly. Those movies tend to be for everyone and the box office results prove it. Look at Star Trek the way CBS/Paramount looks at it. The last couple of things made for just the Star Trek fan have ended in Enterprise being cancelled, Insurrection underperforms and Nemesis bombs. Paramount reboots with the first Kelvin movie, updates the look and feel of Star Trek. They make a movie that appeals to everyone and not just the fans. It becomes the highest grossing Star Trek movie. The second highest is STID and third is Beyond. So pretend to be a CBS/Paramount exec and explain why I should only make Star Trek for “the bread and butter”.
> @oldravenman3025 said: While you make a valid point, one must remember that in recent years the companies that own these franchises have a bad habit of making new installments for non-existent markets, instead of putting a good deal of focus on what has traditionally been their "bread and butter". If these franchise owners were smart, they would clean house in their marketing departments. Because the suits don't know jack about a given fandom, just the bottom line. And it's the fandoms that the money tends to flow from, not the average person on the street.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
[quote="jonsills"] Yes, after all we all know what a daily topic of conversation Lt. William Calley is. What day doesn't go by without an in-depth discussion of the My Lai Massacre, after all?
And how can you ever finish any conversation without bringing up Gavrilo Princip, the man with the single greatest responsibility for triggering the powder keg that was Europe and starting off World War One? Every schoolchild must be reminded daily of that name...
What I'm getting at here is that there are some people whose notoriety is such that they don't need to be mentioned over and over. Hell, Col. Green didn't get a mention in TOS until the episode where he appeared to show up - does that mean it's some huge violation of continuity? Or does it just mean that people don't talk about it endlessly?[/quote]
You'r comparing decades old events with less than 10.
Your argument would be more like if by 1950 everyone had completely forgotten about World War 2 and the Holocaust, and TRIBBLE Germany was still around and just had sort of a friendly rivalry going on with the US and Europe, and nobody ever made anything more than vague mentions about having a bit of trouble with the Germans in the past.
And you can blame the Discovery writers. They could have restricted the 'war' to border skirmishes, or a conflict over a single planet or sector the klingons held holy or something, which then would have made sense as a minor conflict that doesn't really necessarily come up much, but they decided they wanted to have a big earth-shattering war, no matter how little sense it made in the context of TOS, and explicitly told us it was an all out war that saw 1/5th of the Federation conquered, billions of Federation citizens slaughtered as entire planets were butchered , and 1/3rd of Starfleet wiped out.
But sure, I can see how that's all totally irrelevant ancient history to everyone in TOS a whole eight years later, even when dealing directly with the Klingons.
[quote="khan5000"] Actually what these companies have been doing is correct. The big bucks doesn’t come in appealing to just the fan base. The real money comes in appealing to everyone. Marvel doesn’t make movies just for the people who buy comics regularly. Those movies tend to be for everyone and the box office results prove it. Look at Star Trek the way CBS/Paramount looks at it. The last couple of things made for just the Star Trek fan have ended in Enterprise being cancelled, Insurrection underperforms and Nemesis bombs. Paramount reboots with the first Kelvin movie, updates the look and feel of Star Trek. They make a movie that appeals to everyone and not just the fans. It becomes the highest grossing Star Trek movie. The second highest is STID and third is Beyond. So pretend to be a CBS/Paramount exec and explain why I should only make Star Trek for “the bread and butter”.[/quote]
Fun Fact: Budget for Star Trek Nemesis? 60 million. Budget for Star Trek 2009? 150 million.
It's face-saving Hollywood "logic" at it's finest "No, it can't be that WE made a crappy movie, it must be that the AUDIENCE just doesn't like X thing anymore!"
Comparing box office results is essentially declaring that Nemesis was of the exact same quality as ST2009, and therefore obviously the difference can only be because people don't like TNG/anything other than TOS rehashes.
The Discovery writers could have made it just like a border skirmish, or a conflict over a single planet or system holy to the Klingons or something, or something on a smaller scale that it would make sense wouldn't really come up much in TOS...but no, that wasn't "cool" enough for them, so they explicitly tell us that this was an all out war that saw 1/5th of the Federation conquered, billions of Federation citizens massacred, and 1/3rd of Starfleet wiped out.
But sure, i can see how that's all irrelevant ancient history to everyone in TOS a whole eight years later, even when dealing directly with the Klingons.
If there were any coherent or logical connection between them, in TOS we would have seen a badly weakened Federation still struggling to recover from the war in Discovery and eager to make the Klingons suffer at any opportunity. Instead we get a campy frenemy rivalry and no indication that it's anything but sunshine and rainbows across the Federation. Guess they must have just replicated billions of new people, whole planets, and fleets of Starships to cover their losses and then let bygones be bygones.
And yes, everyone would still know who Michael Burnham, the first mutineer in Starfleet history who precipitated the battle that lead to that brutal war, was, and her peculiar background.
Actually what these companies have been doing is correct. The big bucks doesn’t come in appealing to just the fan base. The real money comes in appealing to everyone. Marvel doesn’t make movies just for the people who buy comics regularly. Those movies tend to be for everyone and the box office results prove it.
Look at Star Trek the way CBS/Paramount looks at it. The last couple of things made for just the Star Trek fan have ended in Enterprise being cancelled, Insurrection underperforms and Nemesis bombs. Paramount reboots with the first Kelvin movie, updates the look and feel of Star Trek. They make a movie that appeals to everyone and not just the fans. It becomes the highest grossing Star Trek movie. The second highest is STID and third is Beyond. So pretend to be a CBS/Paramount exec and explain why I should only make Star Trek for “the bread and butter”.
The budget for Star Trek 2009 was just shy of the combined total for First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis.
We'll never know what the result would have been of a TNG movie with the quality and budget of ST2009, because we never got one.
It's typical Hollywood face-saving 'logic' though. "It can't be that we made a bad movie, it must be that the audience just doesn't like X thing anymore!"
Hey, remember when Rick Berman declared that Nemesis flopped because nobody was interested in Romulans? Pepperidge Farm remembers, and also remembers that the 2 Romulans who survive the opening sequence have about 3 minutes of screentime and 2 lines between them.
I left off the reasons on purpose. Everyone has a different reason on why stuff fails. However around the time of Enterprise’s cancellation and TNG movies not doing well the most popular reason was franchise fatigue.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Now it always ran on dilithium. Before there were no know mutineers in Starfleet (along with no women captains, and being under the control of the UESPA) and now there were mutineers and female captains and the UESPA is a defunct agency by the tie of ENT.
It's not something that needs explaining away, it's just an outright retcon like near everything from TOS and has been since TOS was actually on the air when it started retconning itself.
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
Now it always ran on dilithium. Before there were no know mutineers in Starfleet (along with no women captains, and being under the control of the UESPA) and now there were mutineers and female captains and the UESPA is a defunct agency by the tie of ENT.
It's not something that needs explaining away, it's just an outright retcon like near everything from TOS and has been since TOS was actually on the air when it started retconning itself.
Star Trek has always been a bit wobbly on continuity yes, but nothing on remotely the scale that is required to believe that Discovery leads into TOS. Disco writers are just constantly taking a sledgehammer to continuity while yelling "No, it's fine! It'll fit! It'll fit!"
Burnham being a mutineer is not particularly problematic. Giorgiu being a Captain is not really a problem. Those are minor 'whatever' things that always happen in Trek. Burnham being the first Starfleet mutineer in history, whose mutiny presaged the Battle of Binary Stars, which launched a brutal war with the Klingons that nearly resulted in the annihilation of the Federation with huge swathes of space conquered, billions dead, entire planets wiped out, and Starfleet devastated, less than a decade before TOS...and not one single bit of it ever being mentioned or having any repercussions of any kind is just ludicrous.
Enterprise at least had the excuse of being set more than 100 years before any other series, so everything they got up to was decades before the TOS crew were even born. But everyone on the TOS crew is very much alive and full grown adults during the events of Discovery, yet still apparently forget about...absolutely everything.
Now it always ran on dilithium. Before there were no know mutineers in Starfleet (along with no women captains, and being under the control of the UESPA) and now there were mutineers and female captains and the UESPA is a defunct agency by the tie of ENT.
It's not something that needs explaining away, it's just an outright retcon like near everything from TOS and has been since TOS was actually on the air when it started retconning itself.
Star Trek has always been a bit wobbly on continuity yes, but nothing on remotely the scale that is required to believe that Discovery leads into TOS. Disco writers are just constantly taking a sledgehammer to continuity while yelling "No, it's fine! It'll fit! It'll fit!"
Burnham being a mutineer is not particularly problematic. Giorgiu being a Captain is not really a problem. Those are minor 'whatever' things that always happen in Trek. Burnham being the first Starfleet mutineer in history, whose mutiny presaged the Battle of Binary Stars, which launched a brutal war with the Klingons that nearly resulted in the annihilation of the Federation with huge swathes of space conquered, billions dead, entire planets wiped out, and Starfleet devastated, less than a decade before TOS...and not one single bit of it ever being mentioned or having any repercussions of any kind is just ludicrous.
Enterprise at least had the excuse of being set more than 100 years before any other series, so everything they got up to was decades before the TOS crew were even born. But everyone on the TOS crew is very much alive and full grown adults during the events of Discovery, yet still apparently forget about...absolutely everything.
My opinion is that the Battle of the Binary Stars never happened 10 years before TOS. The severe amount of time travel in Enterprise created a new timeline where the Federation was almost destroyed by the Klingons.
There is also the possibility that the USS Discovery is not in the Prime Universe. The USS Discovery was from the Prime Universe, but their trip from the Mirror Universe to back home resulted in them going to a parallel universe that is almost identical to the Prime Universe.
you do know television stopped being used as a form of entertainment LONG before the federation even existed, yes? none of that TRIBBLE survived past WW3
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
yeah, i really don't see even disco's gritty federation trying to cover up or severely downplay the attack on SB1 like a typical government today would for a major accident or attack...they're still too disgustingly goody-goody for that
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
For what it's worth, I think DSC is another of those "not really" prequels. In it's conception phase they already knew thst they would change things, visually and lore wise, in a way that would not fit within established limitations. It was clear we get a completely new uniform and completely new ships (that is however Trek tradition. Installments are very eager to be distinctive from each other). The events are on a scale too large to fit in flawlessly, ENT already went with Earth being attacked.
^ 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
Besides, despite what the suits at CBS say, Discovery is most certainly set in the JJ-verse, making all your arguments mute.
No, Discovery is set in the Prime Universe. Also, if you believe all our arguments are moot, think again. I can't stand the technology argument and other arguments against it used by anti-Discovery haters and skeptics (though there is nothing wrong with being skeptical for good reason). You are free to believe what you want to believe about Discovery. Thanks.
Comments
My character Tsin'xing
Rumours not based on any.. facts.. at all.. in a video by a guy who dosn't like Discovery. Because clearly the whole "Omg Discovery is killing Trek" bullcrap hasn't gotten tiresome at all. But silly me I can't find a sarcasm tag large enough for this post.
I'd say something like "One day toxic fans will learn they don't own a franchise, they're just the consumer. Not the dictator." But lord what an idiot I am, toxic fans don't understand the most basic of Human intellectual capacities. Hence the word "Toxic". Lovely.
While you make a valid point, one must remember that in recent years the companies that own these franchises have a bad habit of making new installments for non-existent markets, instead of putting a good deal of focus on what has traditionally been their "bread and butter". If these franchise owners were smart, they would clean house in their marketing departments. Because the suits don't know jack about a given fandom, just the bottom line. And it's the fandoms that the money tends to flow from, not the average person on the street.
Look at Star Trek the way CBS/Paramount looks at it. The last couple of things made for just the Star Trek fan have ended in Enterprise being cancelled, Insurrection underperforms and Nemesis bombs. Paramount reboots with the first Kelvin movie, updates the look and feel of Star Trek. They make a movie that appeals to everyone and not just the fans. It becomes the highest grossing Star Trek movie. The second highest is STID and third is Beyond. So pretend to be a CBS/Paramount exec and explain why I should only make Star Trek for “the bread and butter”.
> @oldravenman3025 said:
While you make a valid point, one must remember that in recent years the companies that own these franchises have a bad habit of making new installments for non-existent markets, instead of putting a good deal of focus on what has traditionally been their "bread and butter". If these franchise owners were smart, they would clean house in their marketing departments. Because the suits don't know jack about a given fandom, just the bottom line. And it's the fandoms that the money tends to flow from, not the average person on the street.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Yes, after all we all know what a daily topic of conversation Lt. William Calley is. What day doesn't go by without an in-depth discussion of the My Lai Massacre, after all?
And how can you ever finish any conversation without bringing up Gavrilo Princip, the man with the single greatest responsibility for triggering the powder keg that was Europe and starting off World War One? Every schoolchild must be reminded daily of that name...
What I'm getting at here is that there are some people whose notoriety is such that they don't need to be mentioned over and over. Hell, Col. Green didn't get a mention in TOS until the episode where he appeared to show up - does that mean it's some huge violation of continuity? Or does it just mean that people don't talk about it endlessly?[/quote]
You'r comparing decades old events with less than 10.
Your argument would be more like if by 1950 everyone had completely forgotten about World War 2 and the Holocaust, and TRIBBLE Germany was still around and just had sort of a friendly rivalry going on with the US and Europe, and nobody ever made anything more than vague mentions about having a bit of trouble with the Germans in the past.
And you can blame the Discovery writers. They could have restricted the 'war' to border skirmishes, or a conflict over a single planet or sector the klingons held holy or something, which then would have made sense as a minor conflict that doesn't really necessarily come up much, but they decided they wanted to have a big earth-shattering war, no matter how little sense it made in the context of TOS, and explicitly told us it was an all out war that saw 1/5th of the Federation conquered, billions of Federation citizens slaughtered as entire planets were butchered , and 1/3rd of Starfleet wiped out.
But sure, I can see how that's all totally irrelevant ancient history to everyone in TOS a whole eight years later, even when dealing directly with the Klingons.
[quote="khan5000"]
Actually what these companies have been doing is correct. The big bucks doesn’t come in appealing to just the fan base. The real money comes in appealing to everyone. Marvel doesn’t make movies just for the people who buy comics regularly. Those movies tend to be for everyone and the box office results prove it.
Look at Star Trek the way CBS/Paramount looks at it. The last couple of things made for just the Star Trek fan have ended in Enterprise being cancelled, Insurrection underperforms and Nemesis bombs. Paramount reboots with the first Kelvin movie, updates the look and feel of Star Trek. They make a movie that appeals to everyone and not just the fans. It becomes the highest grossing Star Trek movie. The second highest is STID and third is Beyond. So pretend to be a CBS/Paramount exec and explain why I should only make Star Trek for “the bread and butter”.[/quote]
Fun Fact: Budget for Star Trek Nemesis? 60 million. Budget for Star Trek 2009? 150 million.
It's face-saving Hollywood "logic" at it's finest "No, it can't be that WE made a crappy movie, it must be that the AUDIENCE just doesn't like X thing anymore!"
Comparing box office results is essentially declaring that Nemesis was of the exact same quality as ST2009, and therefore obviously the difference can only be because people don't like TNG/anything other than TOS rehashes.
The Discovery writers could have made it just like a border skirmish, or a conflict over a single planet or system holy to the Klingons or something, or something on a smaller scale that it would make sense wouldn't really come up much in TOS...but no, that wasn't "cool" enough for them, so they explicitly tell us that this was an all out war that saw 1/5th of the Federation conquered, billions of Federation citizens massacred, and 1/3rd of Starfleet wiped out.
But sure, i can see how that's all irrelevant ancient history to everyone in TOS a whole eight years later, even when dealing directly with the Klingons.
If there were any coherent or logical connection between them, in TOS we would have seen a badly weakened Federation still struggling to recover from the war in Discovery and eager to make the Klingons suffer at any opportunity. Instead we get a campy frenemy rivalry and no indication that it's anything but sunshine and rainbows across the Federation. Guess they must have just replicated billions of new people, whole planets, and fleets of Starships to cover their losses and then let bygones be bygones.
And yes, everyone would still know who Michael Burnham, the first mutineer in Starfleet history who precipitated the battle that lead to that brutal war, was, and her peculiar background.
The budget for Star Trek 2009 was just shy of the combined total for First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis.
We'll never know what the result would have been of a TNG movie with the quality and budget of ST2009, because we never got one.
It's typical Hollywood face-saving 'logic' though. "It can't be that we made a bad movie, it must be that the audience just doesn't like X thing anymore!"
Hey, remember when Rick Berman declared that Nemesis flopped because nobody was interested in Romulans? Pepperidge Farm remembers, and also remembers that the 2 Romulans who survive the opening sequence have about 3 minutes of screentime and 2 lines between them.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
My character Tsin'xing
Now it always ran on dilithium. Before there were no know mutineers in Starfleet (along with no women captains, and being under the control of the UESPA) and now there were mutineers and female captains and the UESPA is a defunct agency by the tie of ENT.
It's not something that needs explaining away, it's just an outright retcon like near everything from TOS and has been since TOS was actually on the air when it started retconning itself.
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!
Star Trek has always been a bit wobbly on continuity yes, but nothing on remotely the scale that is required to believe that Discovery leads into TOS. Disco writers are just constantly taking a sledgehammer to continuity while yelling "No, it's fine! It'll fit! It'll fit!"
Burnham being a mutineer is not particularly problematic. Giorgiu being a Captain is not really a problem. Those are minor 'whatever' things that always happen in Trek. Burnham being the first Starfleet mutineer in history, whose mutiny presaged the Battle of Binary Stars, which launched a brutal war with the Klingons that nearly resulted in the annihilation of the Federation with huge swathes of space conquered, billions dead, entire planets wiped out, and Starfleet devastated, less than a decade before TOS...and not one single bit of it ever being mentioned or having any repercussions of any kind is just ludicrous.
Enterprise at least had the excuse of being set more than 100 years before any other series, so everything they got up to was decades before the TOS crew were even born. But everyone on the TOS crew is very much alive and full grown adults during the events of Discovery, yet still apparently forget about...absolutely everything.
My opinion is that the Battle of the Binary Stars never happened 10 years before TOS. The severe amount of time travel in Enterprise created a new timeline where the Federation was almost destroyed by the Klingons.
There is also the possibility that the USS Discovery is not in the Prime Universe. The USS Discovery was from the Prime Universe, but their trip from the Mirror Universe to back home resulted in them going to a parallel universe that is almost identical to the Prime Universe.
My character Tsin'xing
Besides, despite what the suits at CBS say, Discovery is most certainly set in the JJ-verse, making all your arguments mute.
arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline/#/discussion/1203368/pve-content-a-list-of-gamewide-polishing-pass-suggestions
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
No, Discovery is set in the Prime Universe. Also, if you believe all our arguments are moot, think again. I can't stand the technology argument and other arguments against it used by anti-Discovery haters and skeptics (though there is nothing wrong with being skeptical for good reason). You are free to believe what you want to believe about Discovery. Thanks.