Oh man. I never got around to watching it!

Nice post!!

It might be big enough to work as a temporary small space station around a planet or just in some general area in need like a fleet in need of repairs and medical aid.

There are pricy probably admins who might appreciate this, as dangerous as it is.

Care if I post it into the lemmy community or even made the support community?

A lot of the focus here seems to be on the military utility, which is also how I suppose the separation feature was presented in the show.

But an obvious use case would probably have been less dramatic. Anytime two things needed to be done at the same time. Send the drive section to the more distant or dangerous location and keep the saucer where it’s safer, like running supplies or something for a planet.

Don’t know it would have been good TV though?! Perhaps if it was used as a plot device to put the ship in trouble?

Thanks! I don’t have clear memories of that episode, but what you describe rings true. I literally just rewatched Disco S1E3 … and was I like “I forgot about the tardigrade!!” when it showed up.

Relatedly, Disco, and IMO Picard, have oddly underrated first seasons which may actually be the shows’ best, with deeper problems, for some fans, coming in as the show goes.

Oh yea I know. In the context of TNG though, where everyone else has US accents, Picard’s Britishness goes up to eleven on that word.

All good!

And they’re all strong points in Discovery.

But I’m not just talking about ethics, but the delivery of Sci-Fi/Star Trek drama about ethics. I don’t think any of the cited examples dug into their issues in the same way, and for me, as well, with the exception of the Vance-Osyraa negotiation (that was wonderful!) … and all I’m trying to do is use the episode to articulate, even for myself, why I feel the way I do about Discovery.

But in contrast, this lawyer (Neera) won by mainly by being a good lawyer (albeit in a tv legal drama kind of way). Setting things on fire with the first witness to create a bunch of fog and doubt about the premise of the case, realising that other important regulations impinge on the case and setting up testimony to substantiate the effect of those regulations.

My memory of most other officer-lawyers is that their methods tend to focus more on the moral “issyew” (Picard’s pronunciation of “issue” in Measure of a Man).

Yep … I was thinking of that episode when I wrote the post. Unfortunately I don’t have a clear enough memory of it to get into details, and I might find you to be right on a re-watch.

Nonetheless, my memory of the episode is that it wasn’t really about anything “ethically meaty”. It might have been enjoyable or interesting, but it seemed primarily character driven, inline with your summary of it (Burnham’s character especially and the dynamic of her immaturity, stubbornness and determination/ambition), which would mean it isn’t really relevant to my thoughts or as a contrast with SNW S2E2 … ?

No. Lemmy doesn’t allow you to follow mastodon accounts or any personal accounts, incl lemmy accounts, for that matter. Similarly, following a lemmy community from mastodon, while possible, generally doesn’t work well.

Kbin provides parallel interfaces to both threaded and microblog content that works well.

Generally though, it’s an unsolved problem trying to unify the whole fediverse into a single interface.

It will be interesting to see if lemmy will evolve to enable some sort of user based following. At the moment, keeping things simple with community subscriptions is part of how lemmy is developed.

Removed by mod

Well, SNW predates DS9, right, so this seems consistent with and even complementary to continuity, unless there’s something in TOS I’m missing.

It’s showing zero posts because she has never interacted with a lemmy community, or at least done so while your instance was subscribed to it.

This is instance visibility, a weirdness that affects all fediverse instances.

Ooh … how did you purge them from your user numbers? Many other admins might not know how to do that … maybe worth sharing?

You have a point, especially as lemmy defines “active” as a user that has at least posted once within the relevant time period. So yes, lurkers definitely wouldn’t count toward the active user count (mastodon and the like use different metrics AFAIU).

Does an admin or something want to make “first contact”?

She probably doesn’t know this place or lemmy exists, and if she wants to post here, like all mastodon users, could maybe do with a pointer or two (but also a warning about following this community unless she’s ok with a firehose on her feed, which she might be).