ValueSubtracted

Programmed in just the one technique, but if you do it right, that's all you need.

Dave Filoni/Kathleen Kennedy situation but in Star Trek.

I'm not sure what, exactly, you mean by this, but both of those people have had pretty acclaimed careers.

I find it hard to imagine looking at the Trek series since 2017 and making a convincing case that the franchise is being mishandled.

I mean, Alex Kurtzman hired the guy, and is EP if "Lower Decks" along with all the other shows...

Let your freak flag fly, maaaaaaaan.

Okay, hear me out:

Star Trek: In Space!

Oh boy, one day we should probably have the Great Borg Queen Debate - it would be a thread for the ages...

we’ve progressed over time to wanting more hard and serious technobabble.

That's the thing, I think the technobabble surrounding Su'Kal is actually pretty good. I will grant that the episode has a lot going on, and it's easy to miss, but it's solid enough that it's had me doing some light genetics research on more than one occasion.

I don't know that I agree that "telepathic" is quite the right word - Su'Kal was a polyploidal mutant whose genes were affected by the dilithium in the environment - a sci-fi extension of a real genetic phenomenon that can occur when extreme environmental stresses are present. The explanation they gave was more scientific that many of those that we've had across the history of the franchise.

At the end of the day, if it doesn't work for everyone, that's fine - I personally think it's a very TOS/TNG idea, sort of a "Charlie X" by way of "The Survivors", and I think it's pretty obvious that the producers wanted the source to have a "human face" if you'll forgive the expression.

If you have to make things up that weren't in the episode, I'm going to respectfully suggest that your point is pretty bad.

I'm also going to suggest that you know that it's pretty bad, which is why you chose to employ such a weak rhetorical device to begin with.

But sure, I'm the one that's offended!

I believe I did responf directly to your misrepresentation of the facts, but do go on.

(please don't go on)

I think the cause of the Burn is a nearly-perfect example of Star Trek's humanist values, and find it interesting when people feel the need to go out of their way to misrepresent it with words like "magic" in an effort to justify their dislike of it.

I was fully expecting a villain (possibly because every press release has referred to a threat), but I hope it's a unique flavour of villain.

It sounds like he's going to play one of the kids' dad or something - given the 32nd century status quo, a more political antagonist could be fun.

Maybe a Terra Prime type or New Essentialist type?

I couldn't agree less re: the 32nd century. They've created an interesting setting, and I'm glad they're going to keep it alive.