www.ditl.org

Agreed that the idea of using contractions while believing himself unable is a sticky wicket. But how exactly did I hear, and you hear it, if it didn't happen?

Mikey wrote:Agreed that the idea of using contractions while believing himself unable is a sticky wicket. But how exactly did I hear, and you hear it, if it didn't happen?

Well either the writers wrote it wrong, or Spiner said it wrong. Simple really.

TV shows are imperfect things, we all know this. What I'm saying is that the "real" Trek wouldn't be a world where everyone is a drooling moron because they disagree with the effects. The "real" Trek would be one where the effects, or dialogue, doesn't have those mistakes in them.

It seems like you're saying, basically, that whenever such an inconsistency arises, you just pretend that the issue in question didn't appear on the show. How much license do you take? It seems to me that if you're going to make up what you like, you're better off just writing fanfic and not watching at all.

Mikey wrote: And it's not "his" version of canon. In an ep, we heard Data use a contraction. Therefore, the fact of Data using contractions is canon. The fact that there is canon that a character believed that Data couldn't is irrelevant.

Ignoring that the fact that the character of Data can't use contractions and this fact was pointed out and used by a member of the crew to figure out what he was seeing was not true. Plus it states on the Official Star Trek site, which paramount has stated is canon that he could not use contractions.

Mikey wrote:Then, if we don't accept what we see and hear as what "happened," there is no need to watch the show. Since you make up what happened, whether it was portrayed or not, why bother?

Well if you are going to watch it as absolute true documentary footage it may be health for you not to watch it. Personal I will watch it for the entertainment value, and use my imagination to fill gaps without a hard set of rules.

Mikey wrote:Agreed that the idea of using contractions while believing himself unable is a sticky wicket. But how exactly did I hear, and you hear it, if it didn't happen?

Screw up of the universal translator, no one has ever said they were perfect, or that the standard language on the Enterprise is English.

Mikey wrote:It seems like you're saying, basically, that whenever such an inconsistency arises, you just pretend that the issue in question didn't appear on the show. How much license do you take? It seems to me that if you're going to make up what you like, you're better off just writing fanfic and not watching at all.

It depends on the situation. The fact that Data is not suppose to use contractions but the script of the actor messes up is not really a story changer, so ignoring that is not a big deal. The Enterprise D firing a phaser from the torpedo tube is also not a big deal. That shot could have just as easily come from the main phaser banks.

What I would wish is that they make one change to what was said. Instead of:

"30% of the surface has been destroyed."

change it to:

"30% of the surface targets have been destroyed."

One word, and it makes everything fit. Lovok provided a list of targets, and they were aout 1/3 of the way through their pre-programmed orbital bombardment. No specifics on how strong those installations are, meaning the TS/OO fleet could just be performing strikes on industrial/military targets, rather than trying to melt the crust. Like what the Borg tried to do in First Contact (though the TS/OO would have been using multikiloton/megaton warheads, rather an a few kg of dynamite in each missile like the Borg).

Their mission would have been to approach the target planet under cloak, and as soon as they decloaked, the computers would begun an automated firing sequence, with a mere 'check' to make sure the target is destroyed. This frees the sensor operators to search for new targets, while a couple of the operators merely watch the progress through the list, comparing the schedule to the timeline. The schedule and timeline would have been developed and refined on the trip to the planet, so there is minimum interference, and enable the command staff to quickly notice if there is a problem.

The Dominion could have had hundreds of sensor decoys on the planet, and due to the power of the shots, one shot would destroy multiple decoys, instead of one building at a time. Their sensors report the extra targets destroyed, and that causes them to be further ahead of their schedule, prompting the remark. Make the first shot targets the ones needing torpedoes, meaning the TS/OO fleet is running out of torps before the Dominion ambush.

Heck, we could argue that the operator was so startled at the rapid progress he left the word off. The people in command noticed he left the word off, but they were more concerned about the high percentage, making them realize they had a serious problem.

Mikey wrote:It seems like you're saying, basically, that whenever such an inconsistency arises, you just pretend that the issue in question didn't appear on the show. How much license do you take? It seems to me that if you're going to make up what you like, you're better off just writing fanfic and not watching at all.

And it seems to me that whenever such an inconsistency arises, you just pretend that everybody meant something different than they said. How much license do you take? It seems to me that if you're going to make up what you like, you're better off just writing fanfic and not watching at all.

Coalition wrote:What I would wish is that they make one change to what was said. Instead of:

"30% of the surface has been destroyed."

change it to:

"30% of the surface targets have been destroyed."

That wouldn't really help, given the earlier description of the predicted effects of the bombardment.

GrahamKennedy wrote:That wouldn't really help, given the earlier description of the predicted effects of the bombardment.

Then simply cut that part of the scene out. After all, the whole point of the scene was to let Garak (i.e. the audience) know what was going on - Tain obviously knew from the start given that the whole thing was his idea, and why exactly would a supernumary need such a detailed briefing anyway? Simply state that they're going to bombard the Founders' homeworld until they're all dead and leave it at that.

Just read this whole thing which took a big lump of time... and now I find myself thinking... WHAT A FUCKING JOKE. Like a couple of two year olds fighting over different shades of red. Really, canon changes day by day depending on what the writers and FX and actors and the time slot and the studio and other viewers throw at us. Part of understanding canon is finding the balance between everything. Look for what fits the GENERAL idea of the show and match things in. It doesn't have to be perfect, seeing how the people involved are human and there for not perfect. Half of what I've read here says "canon is what I say it is because I know more about something I have no say in then you know about something you have no say in". Grow the fuck up! If you want canon then you need to give a little room for the flaws that come with it. The GCS is the "best" ship in the UFP in TNG. Yet it gets its ass beat around on a daily basis. But, we still treat it as the top gun because that was the INTENT of the show. Read a book and you find a misspelled word. Does that make a fouled word canon? No, it means someone fucked up. This should never have been Visuals vs Dialogue. You can't vs them. It doesn't work that way. Some of you may not get this, as much I expect from people. But, you still have to look for intent that comes from visuals and dialogue coming together. Instead of trying to pick which one makes your pants the happiest.

Visuals < Intent > Dialogue

If you ever wanted the "machine being greater the the sum of its parts" line to mean something then just pull your head out of your ass and go back over the crying crap I just had to read.

Deepcrush wrote:Visuals < Intent > Dialogue

Well stated sir!

Whats sad is it took five pages for someone drugged up with the flu to say it.

m52 - if you're going to reply to me three times in a row, do it all in the same post.

Anyway - it seems that people are catching feelings about some of my responses, and I really hope that it's not true. As many people have already paraphrased, "It's only a damned TV show." I have liberally sprinkled my posts with "to me" and "in my opinion" and suchlike, as well as making clear that I still believe that every inconsistency must be treated as an individual situation. I honestly don't care how exactly you feel about any particular instance, and I do often rationalize things I see on the show to fit my own particular conception. My point has always (only) been that if two different people are to discuss one particular IU event, there must be a common platform from which to do so. To use the example we have been using recently, how could I discuss with Graham (for example) Data's use of contractions if I maintain that I heard him use one and Graham maintains that such an event never happened?

Well again when it comes to Data - what was the intent of it? Was it a writer or actor or screen test mistake?