I’m not going to comment on the “should they have” question, but I think this is effective as yet another piece of evidence that the Democrats are not just “persecuting” the opposition party. If sham trials are acceptable and possible, why not use them as much as possible?
These are PEOPLE!
Out there, there are no saints!
Completely agree. The first two seasons are criticized for using leftover TNG scripts. While I think a lot of that is due to the nature of episodic TV production in the 90s, I also think those seasons are incredibly necessary to establish the context of the Federation and how that differs to other cultures in the galaxy (and even on the fringes of the Federation itself). The connection to TNG and the overlap with Voyager also goes a long way to establishing the ethos and morality that the rest of the DS9 story is commenting on.
Take away that foundation and backstory, and you just have another generic space opera.
I am usually on the other side of this argument, in that my main enjoyment of Star Trek is the exploration of ideas and morality plays that we get from TOS, TNG and the early seasons of Voyager. The utopian setting and unrealistic morality of all the main characters in TNG especially are what makes an episode exploring the nature of individuality or whatever topic work so well.
I enjoy DS9 for what it is, but it also set the stage for modern Trek which is so obsessed with “realism” and galaxy-spanning plotlines in a way that I do not enjoy. If I want to watch just an episode or two, I always reach for TNG or Voyager, but if I want to do a longer re-watch then DS9 is definitely my preferred choice.
Episodic is not always a bad thing, and sometimes it is actually a very important feature! I wish modern TV writers and producers would have the same perspective about serialization, but in reverse.
TNG had some multipart episodes and some plot lines that ran across the better part of a season, but the entirety of DS9 takes place against a continuous plot line.
“Entirety” is doing a lot of work in that sentence, IMO. While there is a general setting and eventually a serialized plot, it really doesn’t get to the point where there’s a continuous story until at minimum season 3 and in practice doesn’t stop being episodic until even later.
Even once the main baddies are introduced–which does not actually happen until the final episode of season 2–there are still multiple self-contained episodes that have nothing to do with any kind of ongoing story or character development.
Don’t get me wrong, compared to TNG and even Voyager or Enterprise, DS9 definitely had a story in mind that took multiple seasons to tell, but it’s not like things were carefully known from the beginning. Lots of details change or are quietly retrofitted to fit better once the writers knew where things were actually headed. And that’s fine, by the way! There is still a great story to be told.
I agree with all of this. The Borg Cube especially was very difficult to assemble, and I’ve done some pretty big official Lego sets so I’m used to a good challenge. I had to resort to gluing some parts in place, as some of the plates were bent and just would not stay in place while I worked on the next side.
I also really came to dislike the tiny black pieces they use to add studs to the bottom of some bricks. Too small, too hard to insert, and way too easy to just roll away and never be found.
That said, the final product looks fine and nobody ever questions if they are legitimate sets or not. I don’t regret the purchases, just didn’t enjoy the build process like I normally do.
the rule is you have to consider everyone for employment that can be employed
Emphasis added to the original comment to help those with poor reading comprehension skills.
Why would a refugee or asylum seeker “never have a chance” at getting hired by a company like SpaceX? Seems like that is part of the problem, no?
For all the cries about it being political persecution, I haven’t seen anyone prove any of the evidence being used against him is false.
The whole reason “persecution” is the main talking point is exactly because there is no legitimate defense. There’s not even an illegitimate defense that they can float to the base, so the only thing left is “witch hunt”.
What source are you looking for, exactly? You asked about a specific incident and got a fine summary. If you want more context, it’s very easy to find.
If you are looking for a “source” for a subjective opinion of someone’s personality… I don’t even know what that would accomplish or what form you think that would take.
Linus also wants LMG to be about more than him, and a huge part of the controversy is tied to his decision making power overruling everyone else who says they are working too fast.
He could have appeared, that’s fine, but that nobody was able to get him to drop the defensive attitude and just finally say “sorry” without any pity pleas would have been a very strong signal. That they either didn’t think to do that, couldn’t get Linus to agree or don’t have the power to force him also sends a strong signal in the other direction.
I am a semi-frequent WAN show watcher and I definitely get that vibe. Some people will say that Luke stands up to Linus, but from what I’ve seen it’s only superficial. I have never seen him push Linus enough that it becomes a real disagreement–not on an actual controversy like this, at least. The WAN show where they discussed the Billet Labs review is a perfect example: Luke says “well, maybe we should have re-tested” but then Linus goes off on his “$500 of employee time” tangent and Luke doesn’t call that out as completely ridiculous and hypocritical.
He does voice his disagreement, but not in a way that is going to change anything.
He and his wife are still the majority (perhaps only?) owners, so Linus is still in charge even if he is pretending to delegate some duties.
I think the fact he appeared in the latest video and was still so defensive is enough evidence to prove that point.
You are correct to call me out on this. I edited my comment to clarify that I’ve now read her whole thread and her complaints are valid. The detail she provided with the frat-bro culture and sexual harassment is entirely unacceptable and I have no reason not to give her the benefit of the doubt.
Also, to clarify the part you quoted, I was not trying to downplay Madison’s perspective at all. By “anything of value that she mentioned” I was primarily referring to the rushed production schedule, which is what I got mostly from my original read since that is what she focused on first.
Not entirely sure what you mean. Are you saying we should criticize YouTube for making the algorithm that creators have to cater to, and not LMG for bowing to the demands of that algorithm?
If so, I agree that YouTube should be criticized, but that doesn’t excuse LMG. Plenty of other channels have chosen not to go all-in on quantity and they have likely suffered financially for that decision. That is exactly what I mean by “priorities”.
Big fan of Insurrection getting some respect! I love it for being the big budget, high production mashup of TNG that it clearly is, even though it also doubles down on the Picard-as-Action-Hero trend that ends up ruining Nemesis (IMO).
I would be happy with Emily and Alex starting their own channels. Maybe Dan can join one of them and make the dryest jokes possible. That’s all I really watch for, anyway.
Billet Labs has not done anything to promote the controversy as far as I can tell. Gamer’s Nexus is the one amplifying this, and rightfully so.
The whole point of including that element in their video was as another example of how sloppy, rushed and unprofessional LMG has been operating. The complete lack of respect for an enthusiast tech startup, the exact kind of company that Linus always talks about wanting to support, is incredibly revealing about how the priorities and objectives of the company are practiced.
completely useless for practical purposes
So what, LTT does all kinds of impractical and extreme stuff
much cheaper blocks can perform the same task
not that anyone watching LTT could possibly know this, since they didn’t bother to test it properly
Jokes can usually include a message, and often are more effective at delivering that message than a serious monologue with full citations.
Therefore, saying something is meant to be silly or a joke does not do anything to address whether the message behind that joke is a good one or not.