From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos
From Address: epwise{at}yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Enterprise Was Actually a Very Good Show

MITO MINISTER  wrote in
news:88e947b3-24c7-45e9-935a-36956b349a9f{at}qn4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com: 

> On Jun 6, 10:11aam, YourN...{at}YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>> In article ,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> nyc2...{at}nuttyyahoo.isr wrote:
>> > On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 09:09:22 +1200, YourN...{at}YourISP.com (Your
>> > Name) wrote:
>>
>> > >In article ,
>> > >mrspook2...{at}yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> > >> Enterprise got a very bad rap at the time of its first run.
>>
>> > >> This was primarily a result of the fans' perception
of its many
>> > >> departures from either established, or widely accepted, canon.
>>
>> > >> Some of the criticism was absolutely justified, and some was a
>> > >> bit exaggerated.
>>
>> > >> However, viewed on its own merits in the realm of actor
>> > >> performance, camera work, lighting, sound, special effects,
>> > >> sets, and storytelling...
>>
>> > >> Enterprise was actually a very good show.
>>
>> > >It may or may not have been a good show in it's own right - that's
>> > >sim 
> ply
>> > >people's opinions, and opinions are basically irrelevant since
>> > >everyon 
> e's
>> > >has a different and equally valid one.
>>
>> > Not everyone's opinion is different, or no one would agree with
>> > anyone.
>>
>> > However, I was merely stating mine. It's really ok if you don't
>> > share it... Really.
>>
>> As I said, opinions are irrelevant.
>>
>> > >The FACT is that as a "Star Trek" show it's
complete crap because
>> > >of t 
> hose
>> > >"departures from either established, or widely
accepted, canon" -
>> > >it simply doesn't fit with what came before it. You could slap a
>> > >"Star Tr 
> ek"
>> > >sticker onto "Dora the Explorer", but that
doesn't make it a real
>> > >part 
>  of
>> > >the franchise either.
>>
>> > That is, of course, debatable.
>>
>> > But I suppose you're entitled to your own opinion. :)
>>
>> Nope, it's not an opinion - it's an observable FACT that it's
>> different t 
> o
>> the Star Trek shows and movies that preceeded it. Anyone with even
>> half a brain can see that it's different (you said so yourself) and
>> even the people making it stated it was different, plus the fact that
>> they left "Star Trek" out of the show's title is an even
more obvious
>> clue. The reality is that "Enterprise" was an idiotic attempt to
>> "reboot" the franchise, and like all silly
"reboots" that means it
>> was a different product.
> Why do you give a shit? Lacking a life?
> 

Star Trek is his whole life.  That's why he's so offended when something 
comes along he doesn't like.  It ruins his life.
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux