I like you.
I saw a seemingly legit video showing a new Klingon ship design (to go with the new Klingons themselves). Meh. I am getting more and more pessimistic about this. I didn't want to believe that Fuller gave up being showrunner because the higher-ups were forcing all sorts of trash onto them, but as more details leak out that does seem to be the reality. People are using words like 'soft reboot,' and I'm not even opposed to that if done well. Roddenberry and ST writers never focused on some strict canon that had to be kept, and certain parts of Trek have long been a confused mess. But all this stuff? Ugh.
I know Roddenberry was very focused on canon, as it applied to his utopian vision of the future of humankind .
I have read many books that said that his vision of the future was his guiding principle.
He was Inspired by science fiction greats such as Issac Asimov and H.G.Wells.
They both had a solid foundation of principle, along with the fantasy.
Asimov wrote the basis for Data later being accepted as a real officer in the Federation, and not just an assemblage of parts.
That was all Roddenberry .
He was inspired by Asimov canon of laws regarding robots.
I think the Roddenberry thing is, tbh, a bit romanticized. For example in the original series even the most level-headed, like Spock, sometimes had a 'cowboy diplomacy' mentality, shooting first and leaving questions for later; a "western in space" would be pretty boring without some action sequences, after all. I think the "positive vision for the future" Gene supposedly had, along with goody-two-shoes schtick of TNG, has been read back into TOS to some degree. Although, by 'canon' I meant not so much large themes, but moreso details of who was where in the galaxy, when this or that happened, how entire species acted or looked, or character quirks or motivations (one I have mentioned before is how, in later TNG episodes, the idea that Data can't use contractions is made into a significant plot point... despite Data using contractions in the first season).
I agree withcalmly and caringly trying to understand the basis of their opinion and gently state why you think they erred with specificity.He is saying that I am "Satan" for giving him a directory of local Orthodox churches.
using detailed and dispassionate reasoning/arguments to see your point of view
Please say what you think the best way to engage with this.