• James R Kirk@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Your explanation didn’t explain what “forced inclusion” means and what makes it different from regular inclusion. Maybe you could give an example of each from Star Trek?

          • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            “Nuh uh” isn’t an argument. If you won’t read the comment then I won’t be able to give you a meaningful reply.

              • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                I clearly explained the distinction despite not using the term “forced inclusion,” which I didn’t raise. You did. I can’t reply qualitatively unless you explain which part confuses you.

                  • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    Yes, in response to this comment.

                    Agreed. People should dislike modern Star Trek for it’s bad writing, not because it’s progressive.

                    I didn’t raise the topic. I replied to it. I presume you can see that comment? Are you using an application which truncates the discussion? If you disagree with something, feel free to tell me what :)