So, yes if you're not aware this new Star Trek Discovery is a completely new reboot not connected to the original TOS & TNG timeline, nor is it connected to the JJ Abrams reboot either.
Many fans desperately want a TNG timeline continued Star Trek, so why is the CBS Corporation so stupid?
They could make lots more money rewarding loyal fans, and new fans but instead they'd rather start over with a new version nobody wants. How can CBS Corp be so damned stupid?
Other urls found in this thread:
It's for the normies, i.e. people who only recently jumped on the star trek bandwagon because it's hip to be a nerd/geek
Normies don't care, and just as TNG is still very popular, they'd go with it along with loyal fans of TOS & TNG.
I can't believe how stupid a move this is. CBS Corp would actually benefit financially by sticking to the TOS/TNG timeline.
>So, yes if you're not aware this new Star Trek Discovery is a completely new reboot not connected to the original TOS & TNG timeline, nor is it connected to the JJ Abrams reboot either.
I like the part where there's no source for this (other than some total nobody on a YouTube channel who spams their videos on Sup Forums).
Because I actually want to discuss the topic further, instead of backtracking, which is what CBS Corp wants to do.
BUT since you need source, here's a video with clearly states the rumors which in the past have been proven to be reliable.
That's not a source. They just say "There's a rumor going around that..." but they never say where that rumor is going around or who is spreading it.
Anybody can make up a rumor. I can tell you right now "There's a rumor going around that the main character in Star Trek Discovery is named Buttface McButthead". But without a source, my rumor is worthless.
Without a source, your video is worthless too.
Alright...it's rumor, but likely true given the supporting info, but fuck it...you know a lot about nothing and would rather debate that nothing is nothing...Congratulations in winning an argument that leads to nothing for nothing's sake.
Now, kindly fuck off, and discuss nothing is nothing with interest in nothing for nothing's sake.
How about you fuck off. Stop spamming your videos on Sup Forums. Stop making posts where you spread rumors without mentioning that they're only rumors. How about you delete this thread since the OP has no source other than your own ass.
As I've stated I don't believe the rumors are inaccurate, and very likely true, and something I'm actually interested in discussing.
Spam would be promoting a product to make money, but instead I'm actually here interested in the topic of what seems to be the dumbest move CBS Corp could possibly take.
Who made you Sup Forums dictator to determine what is allowed? You're uninterested in the topic, and yet you continue to debate it as being reliable. WTF, is it to you? Don't agree? FIne, you've stated your opinion, now go, be happy disregarding. That's so difficult?
>Spam would be promoting a product to make money,
Well sure, it's your own monetized video that you're spamming.
Sorry, "rumor says" that it's your own monetized video.
And considering all the times you were caught lying last thread, that rumor is probably accurate.
>Unique Poster count does not increase
Lol, now you're samefagging?
As stated I am interested in the topic I POSTED, dumbass. I am OP...the topic I started, and want to continue. You have trouble with basic reality as it is presented, and would rather be a troll derailing.
But thank you for bumping the thread. You're helping to keep the thread a live, which might give those who are interested more time to see, and comment.
Yes, you are the original poster. And you replied to my post multiple times, because you're trying to samefag.
If your original post mentioned that it's just a rumor, then everything would be fine and dandy. But you presented it as fact because you enjoy misleading people. And all so that you can make money off your monetized video when people ask for a source.
Fucking lol.
>you're trying to samefag.
Sure, because I am interested in the topic. You're stating the obvious now. Thank you, again.
>But you presented it as fact
No, I've stated it as my OPINION, that I believe to be true given the supporting info.
You're lying, and derailing, again. Still, thanks.
>Sure, because I am interested in the topic.
And because you're making money off of the video.
I'm just giving people a little warning that you're being a little disingenuous.
Quit samefagging. Quit lying. Your original post () presents it as fact, not opinion.
>Quit samefagging.
And yet you samefag instructing me not to samefag while samefagging.
As OP, I asked about CBS Corp's stupidity in such a move "if true" as I'm stating it to your prefered liking.
See? I'm wanting to discuss CBS Corp's idiocy in such a move. You do not, but rather do not believe it is try and want me to discontinue, because you don't like it....I get it. You do not see it as factual speculation and do not want to discuss the question. Understood! I shall post how I see fit as relevant.
FAKE NEWS. SAD.
>And yet you samefag instructing me not to samefag while samefagging.
Are you so new to Sup Forums that you don't understand what samefagging means? Damn, you really are just here to shill for and profit from your YouTube channel.
>As OP, I asked about CBS Corp's stupidity in such a move "if true"
No, there's no "if true" in the OP. The original post doesn't present the rumor as opinion, it presents the rumor as fact. You're such a terrible liar, you should be ashamed of yourself.
>shill for and profit
No, I'm pissed of because I'm a fan of Star Trek TOS and TNG, and want it continued. Was that not apparent?
Again, thank you for samefagging yourself, and typing more lies to bump the thread.
The average age of the people with creative control is about 80, it's why they didn't notice the problem with STD as a name either. Also there's a lot of marketters shitting up the board about Star Trek, we may have to wait for them to leave so we can talk about it without getting gaslighted.
>The original post doesn't present the rumor as opinion
Yes, and it was corrected in the post 4u.
>"if true" as I'm stating it to your prefered liking.
You're repeating what has already be stated, and understood. Can't you realise, your point is understood, and not what I OP is interested in discussing because that is NOT what I'm interested in knowing?
You have no proof that it is not true, and have nothing. Nothing on top of nothing, with nothing to discuss the only the same point you've stated over, and over...again and again....goddamn IT!
Fucking, SHIT!
You're why nobody discusses anything here anymore...fucks repeating yourself the legitimacy of well supported speculation. Rumor? SURE, but well supported by many in, and outside of the project.
>one person makes multiple replies to the same post
That's what samefagging means, not reiterating your talking points. Please don't spam and shill on Sup Forums again until you understand the lingo and know how to blend in.
Just collapse his replies and ignore him, he's a shill or troll that's been here all day, he's trying to ruin the thread and giving him (You)s won't help
I AM OP......
GIVEN the RUMORS, that Star Trek Discovery is NOT following the TOS/TNG timeline , why MIGHT CBS Corp NOT give fans what they want?
Why would CBS Corp (RUMORED) choose to NOT progress the TNG timeline of Star Trek, which many fans want?
Now delete the thread and use this as the first post of your next attempt.
Error: You cannot delete a post this old.
they wrote 10 years before KIRK on the screen in the trailer. so uh...yeah
Is it safe to say that Star Trek, as we knew it up until the 2009 film, is dead and never coming back?
>10 years before KIRK
Still that doesn't clarify the same timeline. That could be an intentional deception in marketing. Before a specific year but not of the same Universe.
According to the video rumors JJ Abrams wants nothing to do with Star Trek anymore. There was quite a dispute over the licensing agreement to make those movies.
It's the same time line as the TOS.
Removing Abrams from the equation doesn't mean that we'll ever see Star Trek go back to the way it was before the 2009 film.
>end of the series
>camera pans out from the screen
>it was actually a young james t kirk playing the latest mass effect game all along
huh, really makes you think