BRAGA accuses rabid fans, calls them "Continuity Pornographers"

[AllenS]

Originally posted by spyone


Clearly, I'm in the middle here. While I feel people should cut Braga some slack, I surely don't agree with the statement above.

I didn't have to look far to find a point where Enterprise violates canon.
The first contact with the Klingons was described by Picard as "disasterous" and leading to nearly a century of hostilities.

The contact shown in "Broken Bow" was certainly not "disasterous," and looked favorable to me.

Could it be that perhaps Picard was referring to the first contact between the Klingon Empire and the United Federation of Planets? The Federation did not exist at the time of the Broken Bow incident, and so just because the first contact between Earth and the Klingons seemed to go well (which is not what I saw, but hey...) doesn't mean there wasn't a major diplomatic incident later after the Federation was formed.

Allen

[Phantom]

Originally posted by First of Two
You must have missed the first couple seasons of TNG altogether, then.

All I can say is that I watched most of season 1 of TNG and was able to tolerate it. But I can't handle Enterprise. Not without taking something for nausea.

[spyone]

Originally posted by Capt Daniel Hunter

TrekBBS is poorly moderated, and far too big for its own good.

I used to like the Trek BBS for the wider audience it offers.
However, when I returned from one of my unscheduled absences from the online community, I found that the signal-to-noise ratio made it a tremendous waste of my time.
Whether this was the case before and I had failed to notice, or something changed while I was absent I cannot say. But I miss a few of the people there.

I have decided that this board is almost exactly the right size. Experience with the boards over at WotC (www.wizards.com) has shown me that the more users there are, the more posts that you don't give a d*#@ about will appear every day in the forums you read. WotC is too big, even just the Star Wars section. But a board that is too small is a problem, too, as trafic will drop to nil for weeks at a time and the community will tend to develop homogenous thought. (Like, one board where everyone loves Enterprise and one where everyone hates Enterprise, so Enterprise is never discussed on either). I once heard G.Gordon Liddy read a letter to his radio show from a staunch liberal who was thanking him for presenting his views in a careful, well thought out manner. The letter writer said it helped him to understand his own views, as it became easy to point out exactly where he disagreed with Liddy. The same is true here: I cannot refine my position or my arguements if noone will try to find the flaws in them. I am reminded of the quote, "If you are stupid, you should surround yourself with smart people, and if you are smart, you should surround yourself with smart people who disagree with you." Of course, it is also important to not be the lone voice crying out against the wind: differing viewpoints should be roughly equally represented.
ANYWAY,
A bunch of smaller boards, with many members on more that one to allow ideas to cross-pollenate occasionally, is best.
IMO

[The Highlander]

Originally posted by First of Two
I don't know if 'continuity pornographers' is as accurate as, say...
"continuity fetishists?"

Seriously, it seems sometimes as though there's certain people who can't enjoy something if it's outside that tiny little box, and I get this mental picture of some weasly geek sitting somewhere cranking it wildly saying "OOH... continuity...UNNH..."

ROTFLMAO!

That's it! That's it right there! I've never heard continuity freaks pictured so well!

I salute you, First of Two! That's the best I've ever read! You just made my day.



The Highlander