Home The Bridge

Key information about the event: The Sum of Its Parts - 02/07 (Mega-Event Part 2)

1235711

Comments

  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Davey1983 wrote: »
    I know this is off topic and I have been stopping myself saying anything for a while now, but please can we not use ‘STD’ as an abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery.

    1. It does not fit convention, as @Zombie Squirrel and others have pointed out above.

    2. Shoehorning the new Star Trek title into an abbreviation that also means Sexually Transmitted Disease, is not funny for anyone over the age of 12.

    3. I’m really not a fan of Discovery, but I’ll still at least try and get on a level and debate the reasons why intelligently, not resort to trolling.

    While I hate the STD abbreviation, that is what the producers, Fuller, and CBS themselves have used. Discovery will forever be abbreviated as STD. Using that abbreviation is not a reason to ignore someone's argument as they are using the official abbreviation.

    No, it's not. The producers have said the official abbreviation is DSC. If you want to argue for DIS rather than DSC the same way people use VOY instead of VGR, that's reasonable. But the producers have been consistent from the start, the abbreviation is not STD.

    Here are tweets from John Van Citters from 2016. He is VP of Star Trek Brand Development at CBS.




    The only people using STD are former fans who dislike the show and are using the abbreviation to mock it.

    I say "Disco", because it is used within the show.
    Keep calm & October 15th!!!!!
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Davey1983 wrote: »
    I know this is off topic and I have been stopping myself saying anything for a while now, but please can we not use ‘STD’ as an abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery.

    1. It does not fit convention, as @Zombie Squirrel and others have pointed out above.

    2. Shoehorning the new Star Trek title into an abbreviation that also means Sexually Transmitted Disease, is not funny for anyone over the age of 12.

    3. I’m really not a fan of Discovery, but I’ll still at least try and get on a level and debate the reasons why intelligently, not resort to trolling.

    While I hate the STD abbreviation, that is what the producers, Fuller, and CBS themselves have used. Discovery will forever be abbreviated as STD. Using that abbreviation is not a reason to ignore someone's argument as they are using the official abbreviation.

    No, it's not. The producers have said the official abbreviation is DSC. If you want to argue for DIS rather than DSC the same way people use VOY instead of VGR, that's reasonable. But the producers have been consistent from the start, the abbreviation is not STD.

    Here are tweets from John Van Citters from 2016. He is VP of Star Trek Brand Development at CBS.




    The only people using STD are former fans who dislike the show and are using the abbreviation to mock it.

    I appreciate that you dug those tweets up. I have never heard anyone refer to Voyager as VGR. Is that a thing? I've always seen/used VOY.

    I've mostly seen "VOY", but "VGR" is used occasionally by some people.
    Keep calm & October 15th!!!!!
  • AviTrek wrote: »
    Davey1983 wrote: »
    I know this is off topic and I have been stopping myself saying anything for a while now, but please can we not use ‘STD’ as an abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery.

    1. It does not fit convention, as @Zombie Squirrel and others have pointed out above.

    2. Shoehorning the new Star Trek title into an abbreviation that also means Sexually Transmitted Disease, is not funny for anyone over the age of 12.

    3. I’m really not a fan of Discovery, but I’ll still at least try and get on a level and debate the reasons why intelligently, not resort to trolling.

    While I hate the STD abbreviation, that is what the producers, Fuller, and CBS themselves have used. Discovery will forever be abbreviated as STD. Using that abbreviation is not a reason to ignore someone's argument as they are using the official abbreviation.

    No, it's not. The producers have said the official abbreviation is DSC. If you want to argue for DIS rather than DSC the same way people use VOY instead of VGR, that's reasonable. But the producers have been consistent from the start, the abbreviation is not STD.

    Here are tweets from John Van Citters from 2016. He is VP of Star Trek Brand Development at CBS.




    The only people using STD are former fans who dislike the show and are using the abbreviation to mock it.

    I appreciate that you dug those tweets up. I have never heard anyone refer to Voyager as VGR. Is that a thing? I've always seen/used VOY.

    When Voyager was announced, it understandably evoked recollections of Voyager 6 being corrupted to V'Ger in The Motion Picture and some fans saw VGR a kind of cheeky in-joke. VOY was quickly presented as the official designation, however, so it fell by the wayside early. I've always suspected VOY was to get away from that tangential relationship with TMP, but never read or heard anything official about the matter. I suspect most, if not all, fans who use VGR today are from that vintage and use it because they enjoyed the (tangential) joke and just never let go of it.

    At least that's a joke that relies on Star Trek knowledge.
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anyone else running low on chronitons? We keep having three weeks a month that are chroniton events. Makes me almost want an expedition event which I truly dislike if to just save my chrons.

  • AviTrek wrote: »
    Davey1983 wrote: »
    I know this is off topic and I have been stopping myself saying anything for a while now, but please can we not use ‘STD’ as an abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery.

    1. It does not fit convention, as @Zombie Squirrel and others have pointed out above.

    2. Shoehorning the new Star Trek title into an abbreviation that also means Sexually Transmitted Disease, is not funny for anyone over the age of 12.

    3. I’m really not a fan of Discovery, but I’ll still at least try and get on a level and debate the reasons why intelligently, not resort to trolling.

    While I hate the STD abbreviation, that is what the producers, Fuller, and CBS themselves have used. Discovery will forever be abbreviated as STD. Using that abbreviation is not a reason to ignore someone's argument as they are using the official abbreviation.

    No, it's not. The producers have said the official abbreviation is DSC. If you want to argue for DIS rather than DSC the same way people use VOY instead of VGR, that's reasonable. But the producers have been consistent from the start, the abbreviation is not STD.

    Here are tweets from John Van Citters from 2016. He is VP of Star Trek Brand Development at CBS.




    The only people using STD are former fans who dislike the show and are using the abbreviation to mock it.

    I have used the improper format with good intentions. I didn't know what the official shortcut was and in the context of Star Trek never intended any negative connotations when using it. That being said, I can see why it would offend and will use DSC moving forward for consistency.
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Davey1983 wrote: »
    I know this is off topic and I have been stopping myself saying anything for a while now, but please can we not use ‘STD’ as an abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery.

    1. It does not fit convention, as @Zombie Squirrel and others have pointed out above.

    2. Shoehorning the new Star Trek title into an abbreviation that also means Sexually Transmitted Disease, is not funny for anyone over the age of 12.

    3. I’m really not a fan of Discovery, but I’ll still at least try and get on a level and debate the reasons why intelligently, not resort to trolling.

    While I hate the STD abbreviation, that is what the producers, Fuller, and CBS themselves have used. Discovery will forever be abbreviated as STD. Using that abbreviation is not a reason to ignore someone's argument as they are using the official abbreviation.

    No, it's not. The producers have said the official abbreviation is DSC. If you want to argue for DIS rather than DSC the same way people use VOY instead of VGR, that's reasonable. But the producers have been consistent from the start, the abbreviation is not STD.

    Here are tweets from John Van Citters from 2016. He is VP of Star Trek Brand Development at CBS.




    The only people using STD are former fans who dislike the show and are using the abbreviation to mock it.

    I have used the improper format with good intentions. I didn't know what the official shortcut was and in the context of Star Trek never intended any negative connotations when using it. That being said, I can see why it would offend and will use DSC moving forward for consistency.

    Seriously?

  • JeanLucKirkJeanLucKirk ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anyone else running low on chronitons? We keep having three weeks a month that are chroniton events. Makes me almost want an expedition event which I truly dislike if to just save my chrons.

    Nope. Swimming in Chrons. Also keep in mind that Skirmishes return a lot of them. Many long time players like you have nice reserves saved up. If you are low you probably play every event kinda serious. Make choices, sometimes skip an event/do a bare minimum etc. and this "problem" is solved easily.
  • Average GuyAverage Guy ✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Davey1983 wrote: »
    I know this is off topic and I have been stopping myself saying anything for a while now, but please can we not use ‘STD’ as an abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery.

    1. It does not fit convention, as @Zombie Squirrel and others have pointed out above.

    2. Shoehorning the new Star Trek title into an abbreviation that also means Sexually Transmitted Disease, is not funny for anyone over the age of 12.

    3. I’m really not a fan of Discovery, but I’ll still at least try and get on a level and debate the reasons why intelligently, not resort to trolling.

    While I hate the STD abbreviation, that is what the producers, Fuller, and CBS themselves have used. Discovery will forever be abbreviated as STD. Using that abbreviation is not a reason to ignore someone's argument as they are using the official abbreviation.

    No, it's not. The producers have said the official abbreviation is DSC. If you want to argue for DIS rather than DSC the same way people use VOY instead of VGR, that's reasonable. But the producers have been consistent from the start, the abbreviation is not STD.

    Here are tweets from John Van Citters from 2016. He is VP of Star Trek Brand Development at CBS.




    The only people using STD are former fans who dislike the show and are using the abbreviation to mock it.

    I have used the improper format with good intentions. I didn't know what the official shortcut was and in the context of Star Trek never intended any negative connotations when using it. That being said, I can see why it would offend and will use DSC moving forward for consistency.
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Davey1983 wrote: »
    I know this is off topic and I have been stopping myself saying anything for a while now, but please can we not use ‘STD’ as an abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery.

    1. It does not fit convention, as @Zombie Squirrel and others have pointed out above.

    2. Shoehorning the new Star Trek title into an abbreviation that also means Sexually Transmitted Disease, is not funny for anyone over the age of 12.

    3. I’m really not a fan of Discovery, but I’ll still at least try and get on a level and debate the reasons why intelligently, not resort to trolling.

    While I hate the STD abbreviation, that is what the producers, Fuller, and CBS themselves have used. Discovery will forever be abbreviated as STD. Using that abbreviation is not a reason to ignore someone's argument as they are using the official abbreviation.

    No, it's not. The producers have said the official abbreviation is DSC. If you want to argue for DIS rather than DSC the same way people use VOY instead of VGR, that's reasonable. But the producers have been consistent from the start, the abbreviation is not STD.

    Here are tweets from John Van Citters from 2016. He is VP of Star Trek Brand Development at CBS.




    The only people using STD are former fans who dislike the show and are using the abbreviation to mock it.

    I have used the improper format with good intentions. I didn't know what the official shortcut was and in the context of Star Trek never intended any negative connotations when using it. That being said, I can see why it would offend and will use DSC moving forward for consistency.

    Seriously?

    Yes. Everything is in context. If I am taking about Star Trek Discovery, and I don't know the official shortcut, the first letter of each word gives S.T.D. If everyone accepts that I made a mature comment then no one will think about the other meaning. It may not be the best shortcut, but it can still apply. Since some are thinking about Health Ed class, I will stop using it. (I have also used Disco out of fun not out of malice).
  • This has probably been asked in previous events but the search function gave zero results, so... Does the recurrent crew count as event crew (high bonus) or not (medium bonus for being Discovery crew)?

    I used to think they always count as event crew, but it doesn't look like it in the description.
  • robownagerobownage ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lummelunda wrote: »
    This has probably been asked in previous events but the search function gave zero results, so... Does the recurrent crew count as event crew (high bonus) or not (medium bonus for being Discovery crew)?

    I used to think they always count as event crew, but it doesn't look like it in the description.

    Assuming you're referring to Kol, he absolutely counts as event crew and will get a high bonus on all four events.
  • Lummelunda wrote: »
    This has probably been asked in previous events but the search function gave zero results, so... Does the recurrent crew count as event crew (high bonus) or not (medium bonus for being Discovery crew)?

    I used to think they always count as event crew, but it doesn't look like it in the description.

    Good question.... I also wish to know the answer as it is unclear in the event description.
  • S31S31 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2019
    S31 wrote: »
    Anyone who uses the term "STD" is doing so to be childish and as such their opinions should be ignored. If they want to have a reasonable conversation about Star Trek: Discovery and use the name "Star Trek: Discovery" or "Discovery" or even "Disco" I am happy to listen to them and to debate the merits of the show. But to use "STD" over and over just proves that they have no real substantive arguments for their dislike of the show they just want attention and to ruin the enjoyment of the event and the show for everyone else.

    Well, that's the fault of Bryan Fuller, CBS and every and each of producers they could name show whatever they like even something like Star Trek: New Discovery or Star Trek: NCC-1031 Discovery would evade STD abbreviation.

    Practically they were asking for it.

    And we aren't even talking about the thing that the ship and show could be called anything let's say Rubicon, Nova, Universe, Intrepid or any word from any human language.

    Sure, its their fault when ppl get silly?

    No Star Trek series ever had ST for Star Trek in their shortcut. Its TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT. It wasn t STTNG, STTOS, STDS9, STVOY or STENT, so you absolutely have no point at all! So DIS, or DSC or DISCO is the proper and logical short term.

    But of course, just to diss DSC every lame and childish thing is OK.

    No Star Trek series ever had ST as a shortcut but movies have.
    Star Trek - ST09
    Star Trek Into Darkness - STID
    Star Trek Beyond - STB

    I stick with my point, that's the mistake of producers, what's even worse is that they knew all the time how people will abbreviate it and that's why they are desperately trying shoehorn DISCO as an abbreviation with Disco music, Disco in-universe shirts etc.
  • FlemmingFlemming ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anyone else running low on chronitons? We keep having three weeks a month that are chroniton events. Makes me almost want an expedition event which I truly dislike if to just save my chrons.

    One needs to count the cost in Galaxy Events, especially now. I try to compete, but the chron cost is too high for the returns. I probably have about 5000 chrons waiting to be claimed in my mailbox, and I find they have more of a return in Skirmish events.
    Intentionally Left Blank
  • AviTrekAviTrek ✭✭✭✭✭
    I have found that skirmish events need 0 extra chronitons. Just what you earn and get from drops in the event. The perpetual chroniton machine is enough to keep going without using any extra chrons.
  • Ishmael MarxIshmael Marx ✭✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    I have found that skirmish events need 0 extra chronitons. Just what you earn and get from drops in the event. The perpetual chroniton machine is enough to keep going without using any extra chrons.

    I find that I replenish all my intel-converted-chrons before the end of a skirmish event, but that includes the ongoing daily activities (voyages, fleet, gauntlet, etc). But that's fine with me - I'm happy to have no net decrease in chrons but have a nice boost in honor. I don't burn dilithium in the loot box lottery, but from what I read here, that seems to be a big factor in coming out ahead with chrons.
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anyone else running low on chronitons? We keep having three weeks a month that are chroniton events. Makes me almost want an expedition event which I truly dislike if to just save my chrons.

    Nope. Swimming in Chrons. Also keep in mind that Skirmishes return a lot of them. Many long time players like you have nice reserves saved up. If you are low you probably play every event kinda serious. Make choices, sometimes skip an event/do a bare minimum etc. and this "problem" is solved easily.

    It is true skirmishes give some chrons back but I have never had them give more back to me than I am losing. I am super jelly of your chronitons but the image of you swimming in them sounds funny. No gifs with people swimming in chrons but there is one of someone swimming in gold. So substitute the gold for chrons and we can see what you have been up to.
    cwkgasmtpvot.gif
  • WoghdWoghd ✭✭
    edited February 2019
    Enough about ST:D already.

    SunshineRiker edit: Enough with not contributing to the conversation, already.
  • Please, stay on topic, this thread is for next weeks event. Not Discovery hate, not defending Discovery, or whatever is going on in this thread that is not related to next weeks event.

    Please. Do it for Shan.

    THIS. I've tried to move on 3 times now. I'm no fan of ST:D, but jeez.
  • Mr. LincolnMr. Lincoln ✭✭✭✭✭
    STD butt cheese? Now youre getting carried away!
  • eXo | das411eXo | das411 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Disco Enterprise. Bleh. A monstrosity of unnecesary changes and additions. I’m surprised they didn’t put flame decals and a spoiler on there as well.
    g35qfimoh6od.jpg
    nz3fqp2fo2c8.jpg
    It looks great with its makeover. They had to change it a little to fit in with the look of the new show. It looks good though flame decals and a spoiler sound awesome too. HOT ROD ENTERPRISE!

    ^ this guy gets it - the massive visual reboot for the 1979 movie that everyone loves and was driven by higher budgets and better special effects is MUCH better than the massive visual reboot for the 2018 show that everyone hates and was driven by higher budgets and better special effects :)

    would everyone like the STDSC enterprise more if we had met it during a 10 minute flyby scene?
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    And from a collector perspective you could get the new remastered enterprise then get the original version. Like people who could get the new Number One then get the Majel Barret Number One.
  • Matt_DeckerMatt_Decker ✭✭✭✭✭
    Do we know for sure yet that Lt. Chekov is the version from The Motion Picture? Does he demonstrate any particular skills in that movie? I can't recall him doing much.
    Fleet: Starship Trista
    Captain Level: 95
    VIP Level: 12
    Unique Crew Immortalized: 525
    Collections Completed: Vulcan, Ferengi, Borg, Romulan, Cardassian, Uncommon, Rare, Veteran, Common, Engineered, Physician, Innovator, Inspiring, Diplomat, Jury Rigger, Gauntlet Legends
  • Do we know for sure yet that Lt. Chekov is the version from The Motion Picture? Does he demonstrate any particular skills in that movie? I can't recall him doing much.

    A burned hand and one funny line is all I remember. Does welcoming Spock to the ship give him DIP?
  • Matt_DeckerMatt_Decker ✭✭✭✭✭
    Do we know for sure yet that Lt. Chekov is the version from The Motion Picture? Does he demonstrate any particular skills in that movie? I can't recall him doing much.

    A burned hand and one funny line is all I remember. Does welcoming Spock to the ship give him DIP?

    Just went on Memory Alpha, and it looks like he was security chief/tactical -- so maybe similar stats to a Worf?
    Fleet: Starship Trista
    Captain Level: 95
    VIP Level: 12
    Unique Crew Immortalized: 525
    Collections Completed: Vulcan, Ferengi, Borg, Romulan, Cardassian, Uncommon, Rare, Veteran, Common, Engineered, Physician, Innovator, Inspiring, Diplomat, Jury Rigger, Gauntlet Legends
  • das411 wrote: »
    Disco Enterprise. Bleh. A monstrosity of unnecesary changes and additions. I’m surprised they didn’t put flame decals and a spoiler on there as well.
    g35qfimoh6od.jpg
    nz3fqp2fo2c8.jpg
    It looks great with its makeover. They had to change it a little to fit in with the look of the new show. It looks good though flame decals and a spoiler sound awesome too. HOT ROD ENTERPRISE!

    ^ this guy gets it - the massive visual reboot for the 1979 movie that everyone loves and was driven by higher budgets and better special effects is MUCH better than the massive visual reboot for the 2018 show that everyone hates and was driven by higher budgets and better special effects :)

    would everyone like the STDSC enterprise more if we had met it during a 10 minute flyby scene?

    Yeah but TMP took place ten years after TOS. So the ship looking that different made complete sense.

    It doesn't really make sense to have it look just like we remember it in The Cage, then a couple years later look completely different like we see in Discovery, then a few years later have it look just like it did in TOS again. The time the show takes place is the only reason people have a problem with the redesign.
Sign In or Register to comment.