Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

[Meushell]

I just watched Shuttlepod One. For the most part, I agree about Trip’s behavior. However, Reed keeps doing his messages while Trip is trying to sleep, then basically criticizes Trip for wanting to sleep. If Trip wants to get some sleep, he should be allowed to get some sleep.

[Yukaphile]

I also disagree that damning someone to hell is an important part of a moral code. If someone is a murderer or a sexual abuser, and they get away with their crime, and never feel sorry for it or try to make up for it, well... yeah. Sometimes, what can you do? However, that's a matter of metaphysics, and not something left to mere mortals. Maybe it's hair-splitting, given that it's more about Q not imposing his values on Quinn, but for me... I do think sometimes, someone is entitled to a million years in hell. Or more. Given the nature of their crimes here on Earth.

[Yukaphile]

Probably no one will be surprised with this one, but I also disagree with his assertion in "Redemption" that making the good guys male and the bad guys female is "an interesting approach to diversity." If we are to accept this interpretation as valid, then given the centuries we've had of the plotting, scheming, manipulative lady in shadows stereotype that just won't die, I think it's irresponsible, and I think it points to the misogyny Chuck always says Trek was guilty of. Shocked he didn't catch this, but then he admits to not being the most politically correct guy there is.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Neelix is an annoying yet tolerable character if you’re just watching one or two STV episodes.

His failing as a character comes from watching the series either in binge form or in week-to-week episodic viewing (the intended method).
What is merely annoying but harmless in small isolated chunks becomes enraging when constantly exposed to it over an extended period of time.

I understand that Chuck’s show is comedic first and foremost, and comedy often relies on exaggeration.
That said? I sincerely agree with everything he’s ever said about Neelix. He really is that grating if you watch STV from start to finish.

I binge-watched the series twice. Once inline and once where I hand-picked all the best drama episodes to watch with me mum (then we watched all the unwatched ones inline). I probably picked like 3/5 - 2/3 of all the episodes.

He's a maroon. I don't really think I can defend him that much really. His dangerously stubborn or incompetent points of attitude were here and there, but I don't remember it being too much of a regular thing.

Otherwise, him being a nuisance didn't really bother me. I liked the elevator episode with Tuvac. Him acting as a Ferengi was pretty funny.

Also as was said, Chuck's show is comedy. Along with liking Neelix, I don't find Janeway ridiculously impragmatic, and while Chuck may possibly disagree, I personally don't think her flaws extend to callous sentiments obviously. Her sneering riffs are funny.

On a side note though that kinda reminds me of the broad populace's view of Scully's defiance on the X-Files. She wasn't being daft in not wanting to believe about aliens, she just didn't want to look like a moron when she filed the report to Skinner or the other higher-ups.

[Yukaphile]

I also disagree with him blaming Troi for the Enterprise-D crashing. This is why it's easy for some to mistakenly get the wrong idea that he's sexist, which hey, I don't think he is, but when you're already calling a woman useless, which she is given her character, but then blame her for crashing the ship, which is not her fault, then it's easy to draw the wrong conclusions. Because as far as I recall, Riker was the one in charge and he was the one who ordered her to turn around and run. He could have ordered her to turn about and to face the Klingons, shoot them up. So no, you can't pile this all on Troi. And I am pleased to see he's softened on that as time went on. Again, as I said, I don't think it's that he's sexist, given the way he's called out the misogyny in Trek's history before, no, it's more a case of not thinking this through. It reminds me of what he said in "Profit and Lace" about leaping to the wrong conclusion about things.

[LordGigaIce]

Also keep in mind that that Empress Hoshi has a 100 years of advances stored on her ship in the databanks. One nice thing about Federation ships, they keep historical data on almost everything. So she was probably able to give the Terran Empire a huge leg up in R&D. Presuming she's able to get Mirror Trip or Mirror Phlox or some other loyal officer with some brains on her side, she could be seen as the great reformer who brought a golden age of new medicines and technologies to the Empire.

That would buy a lot of loyal followers for her reign.

Exactly. The Terrans aren't above murdering their way to the top, but they also have very healthy instincts for self-preservation.
Empress Hoshi ushering in a technological and scientific golden age would win her a lot of popular support. And any Imperial Starfleet officer with half a brain would know siding with Hoshi was the only way to get ahead.
Anyone with the means to mount a challenge to her authority would instantly face the hostile masses, which wouldn't make a coup worthwhile.

In addition, while we focus on how backstabbing a lot of them are... just as many display genuine loyalties, too. Trip had no desire to betray the people above him. Phlox was loyal to whoever was in charge and had no aspirations for more until they were suggested to him, and back on the original Mirror Enterprise, Spock made it clear he had no desire to be Captain.

I imagine the Terran Empire operated similarly to a Klingon ship - you could only betray your direct superior (unless you were working for said betrayer), but that decision had to be ratified by the higher-ups, either for the superior officer displaying incompetence, disloyalty, or just the opportunism that resulted in a larger net gain for the Empire. Chekov himself said no one would question the death of someone who disobeyed orders and while Kirk wasn't his direct superior, that disloyalty demonstrated that there would be no serious investigation into it, either.

Well said. The Terrans did establish an empire that lasted for centuries. That doesn’t happen if everyone is looking to betray everyone all the time. The “we all go up in rank” mentality is what’s famous about Terran society (or at least Terran military culture) but that’s not how a stable social system works.

So I’m in full agreement there. It’s likely that coups are only really successful if it’s felt as if the person being overthrown is shown to be lacking.
And if Hoshi used the USS Defiant’s databases to usher in a golden age of technological and medical advancement? There would be no desire to overthrow her.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Also keep in mind that that Empress Hoshi has a 100 years of advances stored on her ship in the databanks. One nice thing about Federation ships, they keep historical data on almost everything. So she was probably able to give the Terran Empire a huge leg up in R&D. Presuming she's able to get Mirror Trip or Mirror Phlox or some other loyal officer with some brains on her side, she could be seen as the great reformer who brought a golden age of new medicines and technologies to the Empire.

That would buy a lot of loyal followers for her reign.

Ironically, I read on Quora that the Defiant was technologically overweight for long term sustainable Terran operation. The ships need to be upkept, and as we all know, technological innovation didn't flourish so well since Terran dominion stifled share of technic innovation between species. In turn, they actually had to start gutting the ship in order for it to be consistent with Terran engineering capacity.

I will try to dig up that QA and relay it here, as I believe I had questions after reading it.

edit: Ah here it is. I will read over it to see if what I'm saying here matches what it is saying.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Regarding the argument surrounding Dukat on page 26, I think I remember Chuck speaking to him as a character making decisions in the show. It's not so much as to whether the character was redeemed, but about the decisions themselves. Even in Trek, scheming characters make scheming decisions via self interest and ulterior motives that establish themselves as antagonists. Pretty much any decision they make is calculated as someone in opposition, unless of course a truce is made to team up against a common enemy.

The point of pointing out dimensionality in someone like Dukat is to highlight that his decisions aren't to satisfy a directive of opposition but of a stray value system.

[clearspira]

I also disagree with him blaming Troi for the Enterprise-D crashing. This is why it's easy for some to mistakenly get the wrong idea that he's sexist, which hey, I don't think he is, but when you're already calling a woman useless, which she is given her character, but then blame her for crashing the ship, which is not her fault, then it's easy to draw the wrong conclusions. Because as far as I recall, Riker was the one in charge and he was the one who ordered her to turn around and run. He could have ordered her to turn about and to face the Klingons, shoot them up. So no, you can't pile this all on Troi. And I am pleased to see he's softened on that as time went on. Again, as I said, I don't think it's that he's sexist, given the way he's called out the misogyny in Trek's history before, no, it's more a case of not thinking this through. It reminds me of what he said in "Profit and Lace" about leaping to the wrong conclusion about things.

Is it Riker's fault as well? Yes, absolutely. He is supposedly the best pilot on the ship, Data is also on the bridge who is an accomplished pilot, Worf is also on the bridge who is an accomplished pilot. Any of these would have made a better choice than Troi who to my knowledge we have never seen so much as fly a shuttle let alone a starship.

HOWEVER, I get a massive sense of Neelix-level Dunning Kruger effect in action here as she could have said ''I'm not up to this Will, Data please take the helm and I'll take over at ops which is far more suited to my abilities.'' But no, she took the helm and aimed the ship at the planet. And don't give me the ''but the shockwave! That was what made the ship hit the planet!" excuse that I have heard in defence of her so many times before. Look how far from the stardrive they are when it blows up; she had plenty of time to steer that saucer up, down left or right so that the shockwave would have pelted them in a different direction.

Also, has he softened up on the ''Troi is crap at everything she does'' mantra? I don't think so. Especially since to say anything else would be a lie.

[Yukaphile]

True. Though IIRC, wasn't Riker yelling at her to do so? Turning Data into a psychopath, that I could see him attacking her endlessly over. I mean... that he turned her own words back on her, when later on even the three of them are discussing "negative emotions," and she encourages exploring the "darker" aspects of your psyche? Really does paint her, if not the worst at her job, then at least somewhere around "average," whether below or slightly above, whatever. But crashing the Enterprise seems like a multiple-person fuckup here. She was to blame. So was Riker. So was everyone on the bridge who didn't have the good sense to think to attack them back. Or point out Riker was the best pilot. Hell, Insurrection, for as flawed as it was, remembered this.