Opinion: Was DS9 the more "real" than TNG or Voy?

[Admiral_K]

By more real, I don't mean that its science was neccessarily better (although it might have been), I mean that the people and events were more real.

Some examples:

Currency - We see it used frequently, and by Federation personell as well. One of the few times we see money used by UFP citizens/employees and thus giving evidence that it is NOT a completely communitistic society (Socialistic, perhaps).

Enlisted men - Few times, that we see people who DIDN'T go to starfleet academy, yet still working as members of starfleet. In most other episodes, EVERYONE went to the academy.

A federation secret service - Section 32. These guys gave a touch of realism to the UFP government. However, I think they sort of ruined this group latter on by making them out to be some rougue organization rather than merely a super secret part of starfleet. Again though, this could have been just a ruse.

Realisitic characters - Sisko wasn't some over idealized moron who believed that destruction of the Federation was preferable to "betraying its ideals". He appeared as a man who had moral conviction, but realized there was a time and place to bend those morals for "the greater good". He is the prime example, but not the only one. Many other characters seemed segnificantly more "real" or "human" than in other series. They also seemed to be much more consistent than characters from the other series (Particularly Voy, where we had "blood n guts janeway" one minute and "Kathryn the Dove" the next).

More realistic events - The war wasn't trivialized. Starfleet didn't hide its true nature as a Military Organization. Warships were actively designed and built, and we see actual FLEETS of ships engaging in battles.



Now it wasn't perfect, and many say it was a "rip off of Babylon 5". They definately could have used some improvement in the area of ground combat (Pajama body armor anyone?), but on the whole I think its alot better than TNG and more than just a trekizied version of B5.

Fixed thread title. ~Crayz9000

[Durandal]

I'd have to agree, although it's still off in fantasy land, comparatively speaking. One thing I always hated about TNG was the costume design. Even supposed "terrorists" like the Maqui all wore these obnoxious pastel colors and jumpsuits.

[BabelHuber]

Currency - We see it used frequently, and by Federation personell as well.

Latinum is not the Federation currency. But we saw a lot of federation personal in Quark´s bar, which doesn´t accept Federation credits (as seen e.g. in the first Voy episode). Perhaps the Federation personal receives small amounts of Latinum on DS9, after all they are not working in Federation Space, so they won´t get their drinks for free like in 10 forward on the E-E (OTOH they can drink real alcohol, so they should be happy).

[Patrick Degan]

By more real, I don't mean that its science was neccessarily better (although it might have been), I mean that the people and events were more real.

Some examples:

Currency - We see it used frequently, and by Federation personell as well. One of the few times we see money used by UFP citizens/employees and thus giving evidence that it is NOT a completely communitistic society (Socialistic, perhaps).

As has been covered elsewhere, this indicates the existence of black marketeering, an activity which thrives in communistic societies. None of the currency used is Federation issue, and any independent business concerns whcih operate in the series are outside of the Federation sphere of influence.

Enlisted men - Few times, that we see people who DIDN'T go to starfleet academy, yet still working as members of starfleet. In most other episodes, EVERYONE went to the academy.

The series still does not contraindicate the established pattern of every member of Starfleet either going to the Academy or Academy school. There are no "boot camps" ever seen or referred to. There've been enlisted personnel in ST going back to TOS, but they've never clarified the mechanism by which enlisted recruits are trained.

A federation secret service - Section 31. These guys gave a touch of realism to the UFP government. However, I think they sort of ruined this group latter on by making them out to be some rougue organization rather than merely a super secret part of starfleet. Again though, this could have been just a ruse.

No, it was down to the writers' pathetic attempt to introduce the same sort of dark conspiracy mechanics which were a staple of Babylon 5 and failing miserably.

Realisitic characters - Sisko wasn't some over idealized moron who believed that destruction of the Federation was preferable to "betraying its ideals". He appeared as a man who had moral conviction, but realized there was a time and place to bend those morals for "the greater good". He is the prime example, but not the only one. Many other characters seemed segnificantly more "real" or "human" than in other series. They also seemed to be much more consistent than characters from the other series (Particularly Voy, where we had "blood n guts janeway" one minute and "Kathryn the Dove" the next).

Sisko's main hobby was pontification, especially when his role as the Pope of the Voodoo People went to his head. Several times, he allows his loyalty to the Wormhole aliens to overcome what should be his primary loyalty to his nation.

More realistic events - The war wasn't trivialized. Starfleet didn't hide its true nature as a Military Organization. Warships were actively designed and built, and we see actual FLEETS of ships engaging in battles.

More so than TNG, perhaps. But the DS9 writers essentially treated the war as backdrop to the soap opera of the characters. The war was fought stupidly on both sides and showed the writers' basic lack of knowledge of military strategy or the most essential hallmarks of military thinking. The final episode from the opening scene in which Sisko steps onto the bridge of his flagship and says "What d'you say we end this war", and from that onward to Martok continuously babbling about the honour of a glorious death in battle blah blah blahblahblab... to the Changeling ordering ground troops to butcher a planetary population of 800 million in response to a revolutionary movement which began only three episodes prior to the entire war ending with Odo having a quickie with Female Changeling, was just inane.

[Patrick Degan]

Whoops —sorry about the double-post. Moderator: please delete the first reply post if you could.

You guys are such a bunch of klutzes. ~Crayz9000

[nightmare]

That improved realism is what I like about DS9. It's almost not Star Trek.

[Admiral_K]

Don't you think you are being a bit overly critical patrick?

I've seen zero evidence that the federation doesn't have currency or pay its employees something. How do they acquire latinum? How do other races do business with the Federation? Do they use a barter system? I doubt it. Latinum seems to be a universal currency, that most everyone uses much like Gold used to be. I'm sure the federation has a large stockpile of latinum, and issues credits with a set amount of exchange, again much like the gold standard used to be.

Despite what some would have you believe, we have seen examples of privatley owned buisnesses and ships who operate in federation space. Sisko's dads restaurant for example. Cassidy Yates and her cargo ship etc. I don't think they just "work for free". They must be paid or be credited in some way for doing so.

We've also seen isntances of enlisted men who DO NOT go to starfleet academy, namely Quarks good brother Rom, who joins part of the station maintenance crew. Obrien himself states that he is an enlisted man, and not an officer as would have graduated from the academy.

Sisko may show some dual loyalty, but thats not altogether surprising considering his origins. He WAS willing to destroy the wormhole if that is what would have been required, however that was a last resort since the wormhole also had great value. The wormhole aliens just so happened to be favorable to his side.

I wont address the rest of your points because they are mostly just oppinionated commentary.

[Joe Momma]

A federation secret service - Section 31. These guys gave a touch of realism to the UFP government. However, I think they sort of ruined this group latter on by making them out to be some rougue organization rather than merely a super secret part of starfleet. Again though, this could have been just a ruse.

I thought the storyline had potential, but it was quickly ruined by its clumsy handling. Their operational security can't be that great if they announce their identity to a guy like Bashir (who valued his morality over expediency, which was the exact opposite of Section 8's ethos) within a few hours of meeting him. Having Sloane walk around in his Psi-Corp uniform all the time didn't help much either.

More realistic events - The war wasn't trivialized. Starfleet didn't hide its true nature as a Military Organization. Warships were actively designed and built, and we see actual FLEETS of ships engaging in battles.

The war added some needed meat, I agree. Still, some parts of it were less than engaging, if you'll forgive the pun. Ground combat in particular was handled so badly that it would have been better off if they'd just skipped it, IMO.

I liked the series better than TNG or VOY overall, but I dropped out during the last year and a half because it seemed to lose its focus. The added the war to give the show more tension and then wasted entire episodes on baseball games and holodock follies. The Prophets/Pah-wraiths story-arcs became silly pretty quickly and didn't seem to fit in well with the Trek style. Both of these hampered some of that potential realism you mentioned.

-- Joe Momma

[The Enterpriser]

Actually, I think Deep Space 9 was a solid and infinately better series in the realism area if not quite the Sci-fi that TNG was. Granted the ST universe was much less detailed without DS9, so I think that DS9 is a good improvement. Boobyprise of course doesn't count and Voyager never told us much about the Federation

I think S31 was good example of how the Federation could do what was necessary so it was a bit more shocking than say, Telepathic Corps or Earth Force etc. in Babylon 5, still both series are great

[Cpt_Frank]

The only reason DS9 didn't suck ass as much as TNG and VOY did was that it was a B5 ripoff in many areas. A very bad one, but still better than most of TNG and all of VOY.

[BabelHuber]

I've seen zero evidence that the federation doesn't have currency or pay its employees something.

Hello? The Federation does have credits, but they are worthless outside of Federation space, as I have already stated above.
You must remember that DS9 is not in Federation space. So the Federation has to give money to its staff for leisure activities, which wouldn´t be the case if they worked within the Federation´s boarders.

Have you seen somebody paying for something in 10 Forward? Or on Raisa? Or elsewhere in Federation territory?

How do they acquire latinum? How do other races do business with the Federation?

How did the Soviet Union get Dollars? By trading goods of course! Russian Vodka, caviar, gas and weapons were worth some cash. The German Democratic Republic even had an entire organization devoted to get valuta for trading (and they always didn´t have enough, of course - which sane person in the West would have bought an East German car?)

So communistic societies do have valuta, but usually they don´t have enough of it, because the products they build will always be inferiour to free-market products as long as the government doesn´t focus on it.

[Lord Pounder]

Sisko was always my fav character of the New ST universe. Sure he might be a bit overdramatic but he had the 1st dedicated warship in ST history. No fecking useless science crap on that ship just lots of guns, the way it should be.

Regarding Rom, he was not a member of Star Fleet or the federation, he is a paid worker by the Bjorans, it's a bjoran uniform he wears.

[Uraniun235]

Sisko was always my fav character of the New ST universe. Sure he might be a bit overdramatic but he had the 1st dedicated warship in ST history. No fecking useless science crap on that ship just lots of guns, the way it should be.

Regarding Rom, he was not a member of Star Fleet or the federation, he is a paid worker by the Bjorans, it's a bjoran uniform he wears.

Yeah, because exploration of the galaxy is a totally pointless venture.

[Patrick Degan]

Don't you think you are being a bit overly critical Patrick?

After suffering through that show for seven years? Ummm.... Nope.

I've seen zero evidence that the federation doesn't have currency or pay its employees something. How do they acquire latinum? How do other races do business with the Federation? Do they use a barter system? I doubt it. Latinum seems to be a universal currency, that most everyone uses much like Gold used to be. I'm sure the federation has a large stockpile of latinum, and issues credits with a set amount of exchange, again much like the gold standard used to be.

There is a simple way to settle this. Kindly quote the episodes of either TNG or DS9 which back your contention, please.

Despite what some would have you believe, we have seen examples of privatley owned buisnesses and ships who operate in federation space. Sisko's dads restaurant for example. Cassidy Yates and her cargo ship etc. I don't think they just "work for free". They must be paid or be credited in some way for doing so.

As has been pointed out several times, we already have at least one real-life example in history which demonstrates a system in which a "currency" which is non-negotiable outside the boundaries of its national territory is used for business, but goods and real currencies must be obtained by barter or black marketeering; just as there was also numerous "small" businesses such as restaurants or service shops which nevertheless operated entirely through state sufferance. The Soviet Union. Their people were paid in rubles, which were non-negotiable outside Soviet territory. The only way to obtain consumer goods not available within the country or real currencies such as dollars or deutchemarks was through barter and black marketeering.

We've also seen isntances of enlisted men who DO NOT go to starfleet academy, namely Quarks good brother Rom, who joins part of the station maintenance crew. Obrien himself states that he is an enlisted man, and not an officer as would have graduated from the academy.

Rom wasn't in the Federation Starfleet but rather under the Bajoran military authorities. And TNG established that Starfleet enlisted personnel are trained through an Academy-controlled programme.

Sisko may show some dual loyalty, but thats not altogether surprising considering his origins.

His origins are immaterial. He is a Federation citizen and an officer in its military. That is where his sole loyalty and his responsibilities reside.

Look at it this way, would an officer in the United States Navy be allowed to compromise his loyalty to the Untied States because he felt a parallel loyalty to his country of ethnic origin?

He WAS willing to destroy the wormhole if that is what would have been required, however that was a last resort since the wormhole also had great value. The wormhole aliens just so happened to be favorable to his side.

I'm sorry, but the series directly contradicts this contention. Sisko clearly was not willing to collapse the Bajoran terminus of the wormhole since he not only did nothing for several weeks to close off that avenue of attack while the enemy grew strong on his own frontier, he instead set his officers to develop a plan to blockade the wormhole. And yes, the wormhole had great value —which is the primary reason to collapse it, to deny it to the enemy; a cardinal rule of warfare. Depending upon the caprice of the wormhole aliens was a horribly stupid risk to the survival of his own nation.

[TheDarkling]

Sisko attempted to close the wormhole however a founder interfered and the end result was the wormhole could not be closed (even with trilitium explsoives or a super nova) which was why the mining plan was later put into action.

What other examples do you have of Sisko putting his emissary status over his oath to SF because I can think of one occassion when Ross put it on the line for him and Sisko did his duty to SF.

[Patrick Degan]

Sisko attempted to close the wormhole however a founder interfered and the end result was the wormhole could not be closed (even with trilitium explsoives or a super nova) which was why the mining plan was later put into action.

I am aware of the ridiculous technobabble "stabilisation" of the wormhole, thank you. It follows logically that anything that can be done can be undone.

That's sort of why you employ scientists and engineers, is it not?

What other examples do you have of Sisko putting his emissary status over his oath to SF because I can think of one occassion when Ross put it on the line for him and Sisko did his duty to SF.

How about his failure to destroy the station upon retreating from the Bajoran system, for a start? Or not even attempting to find a means to collapse the Bajoran terminus of the wormhole? Or his deliberately risking his life and sanity on one occasion to expose himself to one of the Orbs of Prophecy, which had the side-effect of blowing the crucial negotiation to bring Bajor into the Federation when he disrupted the proceedings while under the Orb's influence?

An exception does not destroy the rule, Darkling.

[TheDarkling]

The Federation obviously didn't want to annoy the Bajorans thus not destroying the station (not Siskos fault, Im sure he inquired what he was supposed to do about the station and the Federation destroying someone elses property isn't exactly above board).

Weakening the wormhole again may not have been possible and O'Brien seemed to strongly imply this so unless you can prove it can be undone you fail on this point aswell (your point that anything done can be undone ius silly, afterall if it were true then closing the wormhole is pointless since it can be undone).

He told Bajor to stay out of the Federation based upon intel (the visions do pan out however silly it may seem to us) and at the end of the day it works out ok for Bajor and the Federation.

No one example does not destroy the rule however you A) Don't have a rule and B) At best have one very dodgy example which wouldn't disprove the rule (He goes against the Prophets wishes and he also tried to close he wormhole, 2 to (maybe) 1 at the moment).

Care to bring more evidence to the table?

[Patrick Degan]

The Federation obviously didn't want to annoy the Bajorans thus not destroying the station (not Siskos fault, Im sure he inquired what he was supposed to do about the station and the Federation destroying someone elses property isn't exactly above board).

To be brutally blunt, who gives a flying fuck what the Bajorans think? That's for Social Studies period, at 1400 hours after you've prevented your homespaces from being invaded, which is Priority Number One. Not ruffling the Bajorans' feathers is Priority Number 206 on that scale. That is how you win a war —by doing what is strategically necessary to achieve that aim.

Weakening the wormhole again may not have been possible and O'Brien seemed to strongly imply this so unless you can prove it can be undone you fail on this point as well (your point that anything done can be undone ius silly, afterall if it were true then closing the wormhole is pointless since it can be undone).

Nice try, Darkling. If the wormhole was collapsed, there would be no terminus from which anybody from either side would be able to lock onto and reopen the gateway. You can't reopen something that you can no longer find.

As for being unable to undo the Founder "reinforcement" of the wormhole structure, I hate to have to bring this up, but in the Real World, it has always been easier to destroy than to create. Always. Without fail.

He told Bajor to stay out of the Federation based upon intel (the visions do pan out however silly it may seem to us) and at the end of the day it works out ok for Bajor and the Federation.

That is not how the episode depicted it. Sisko spent half the episode babbling about the locusts destroying Bajor after he subjected himself to one of the Orbs. His entire "rationale" was based upon the visions and not intel.

No one example does not destroy the rule however you A) Don't have a rule and B) At best have one very dodgy example which wouldn't disprove the rule (He goes against the Prophets wishes and he also tried to close he wormhole, 2 to (maybe) 1 at the moment).

Wrong. I brought up three examples from the series itself. And we certainly have Sisko's observed behaviour in the series as demonstration of his divided loyalties.

Oh, and in the incident in which he actually does go against the Prophets' wishes, he ends up resigning his commission during a war of national survival to try to vision-quest his way back into their favour.

Care to bring more evidence to the table?

The television series Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. I'm sorry if the actual canon evidence doesn't suit you, but that is not my problem. Through seasons five through seven, we see him become increasingly obsessed with his role as emissary. We see him compromise the security of the Alpha Quadrant in order to appease the wormhole aliens. We see him risk his own life and sanity in an effort to achieve closer rapport with the wormhole aliens. We see him try to appease the wormhole aliens to return to their good graces after his one instance of acting against their interests. We see him progressively identify himself as being "of Bajor" instead of being from Earth which is where he was actually born. He relates to the wormhole aliens increasingly from the Bajoran perspective as divinities instead of alien life forms as the series wears on.

That is what the television series shows us.

[TheDarkling]

The Federation obviously didn't want to annoy the Bajorans thus not destroying the station (not Siskos fault, Im sure he inquired what he was supposed to do about the station and the Federation destroying someone elses property isn't exactly above board).

To be brutally blunt, who gives a flying fuck what the Bajorans think? That's for Social Studies period, at 1400 hours after you've prevented your homespaces from being invaded, which is Priority Number One. Not ruffling the Bajorans' feathers is Priority Number 206 on that scale. That is how you win a war —by doing what is strategically necessary to achieve that aim.

You are missing the point the Federation gave him his orders on what to do and the Federation which was looking for allies throughtout the war wouldnt have been helping its image by destroying someelses property.

Stop thinking that because you would have destroyed the station thats what Sisko would have been ordered to do, I have supplied reasons for the Feds not wanting it destroyed, we know Sisko got orders from SF so it seems rather simple that he was ordered to leave the station intact.

Weakening the wormhole again may not have been possible and O'Brien seemed to strongly imply this so unless you can prove it can be undone you fail on this point as well (your point that anything done can be undone ius silly, afterall if it were true then closing the wormhole is pointless since it can be undone).

Nice try, Darkling. If the wormhole was collapsed, there would be no terminus from which anybody from either side would be able to lock onto and reopen the gateway. You can't reopen something that you can no longer find.

As for being unable to undo the Founder "reinforcement" of the wormhole structure, I hate to have to bring this up, but in the Real World, it has always been easier to destroy than to create. Always. Without fail.

You still havent provided proof that it can be undone, the cheif states the wormhole is to strong to close now and he doesn't say they can try again to weaken it therefore if there is a failure here its from Siskos crew (and the scientists on Trill who came up with the method).

Now unless you are about to tell me you have some evidence backing up your claim this line of reasoning is going nowhere.

He told Bajor to stay out of the Federation based upon intel (the visions do pan out however silly it may seem to us) and at the end of the day it works out ok for Bajor and the Federation.

That is not how the episode depicted it. Sisko spent half the episode babbling about the locusts destroying Bajor after he subjected himself to one of the Orbs. His entire "rationale" was based upon the visions and not intel.

Hmm beings who can see the future and have been proven to have this ability (both by the events they have predicted and by their very nature) start telling you that Bajor (a planet they have an interest in) will be in danger if it joins the Federation, seems like Intel to me.

If a mechanic told me my break lines were cut it would be rather stupid of me to get in my car and drive off don't you think?

You are also missing the fact that Siskos actions here saved Bajor and possibly the Federation.

No one example does not destroy the rule however you A) Don't have a rule and B) At best have one very dodgy example which wouldn't disprove the rule (He goes against the Prophets wishes and he also tried to close he wormhole, 2 to (maybe) 1 at the moment).

Wrong. I brought up three examples from the series itself. And we certainly have Sisko's observed behaviour in the series as demonstration of his divided loyalties.

Oh, and in the incident in which he actually does go against the Prophets' wishes, he ends up resigning his commission during a war of national survival to try to vision-quest his way back into their favour.

Yuo may have brought up three examples but if you examples don't prove anything it dosn't exactly help you case or shall I prove Sisko is a loyal member of Sf because hes good at peeling potatoes?

He didn't go off on a "vision quest" as you put it and he didn't resign his comission, he was given a leave of absence after his friend died and he failed in his duty to SF which was what bothered him the most

Sisko: I've failed as the Emissary and,
for the first time in my life,
I've failed in my duty as a
Starfleet officer.

Now while I don't agree with letting have leave whenever he wants during a war if he wasn't in his right mind hes better off not in command.

Care to bring more evidence to the table?

The television series Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. I'm sorry if the actual canon evidence doesn't suit you, but that is not my problem. Through seasons five through seven, we see him become increasingly obsessed with his role as emissary. We see him compromise the security of the Alpha Quadrant in order to appease the wormhole aliens. We see him risk his own life and sanity in an effort to achieve closer rapport with the wormhole aliens. We see him try to appease the wormhole aliens to return to their good graces after his one instance of acting against their interests. We see him progressively identify himself as being "of Bajor" instead of being from Earth which is where he was actually born. He relates to the wormhole aliens increasingly from the Bajoran perspective as divinities instead of alien life forms as the series wears on.

That is what the television series shows us.

He identifies with the people of Bajor and would like to settle down there after they join he federation but he also tells Ross that he will go wherever SF send him just that his home will be on Bajor.

I also don't think he ever thinks of the wormhole aliens as gods just as beings which are looking ut for Bajort (which is more or less correct) and while yes he was born on arth one of his parents was a wormmhole alien don't forget.

As for risknig his sanity if you refer to his "vision quest" as you put it then without doing that he was sidelined anyway if you refer to the incident with the vision about Bajor joining the Federtion then he risked his life and sanity to save Bajor which is the mission he was sent there to do (and in the process he helps the federation aswell).

Its ok saying this is what the series shows us but without specific examples and evidence that backup your claim it doesn't work, I could say its shows us tthat Humans become 40 foot giants in the future, would you simply take that on faith or would you ask for evidence (or just outright call it a lie)?

[Patrick Degan]

The Federation obviously didn't want to annoy the Bajorans thus not destroying the station (not Siskos fault, Im sure he inquired what he was supposed to do about the station and the Federation destroying someone elses property isn't exactly above board).

To be brutally blunt, who gives a flying fuck what the Bajorans think? That's for Social Studies period, at 1400 hours after you've prevented your homespaces from being invaded, which is Priority Number One. Not ruffling the Bajorans' feathers is Priority Number 206 on that scale. That is how you win a war —by doing what is strategically necessary to achieve that aim.

You are missing the point the Federation gave him his orders on what to do and the Federation which was looking for allies throughtout the war wouldnt have been helping its image by destroying someelses property.

Who would have been upset? The Klingons? They were already on the Federation side. The Romulans? They were neutral in the war already until Sisko faked evidence of a Dominion assassination attempt on their senate. Demonstrating a willingness to do whatever was necessary to stop the enemy would convince space powers that the Federtion had its priorities straight, and everybody understands what military necessity is.

Stop thinking that because you would have destroyed the station thats what Sisko would have been ordered to do, I have supplied reasons for the Feds not wanting it destroyed, we know Sisko got orders from SF so it seems rather simple that he was ordered to leave the station intact.

Forgive me for attempting to interject anything as trivial as military logic into the discussion.

You still havent provided proof that it can be undone, the cheif states the wormhole is to strong to close now and he doesn't say they can try again to weaken it therefore if there is a failure here its from Siskos crew (and the scientists on Trill who came up with the method).

Now unless you are about to tell me you have some evidence backing up your claim this line of reasoning is going nowhere.

"Methods" based upon subspace field technowank. Nobody even thinks to apply a simple brute-force solution, such as injecting a sufficent amount of energy to overcome the wormhole's field stability threshold. And before you say "impossible", I would remind you that this is exactly what the principle of nuclear fission is based upon. I know that evidence from the real world may not appeal to you, but it does provide a concrete example of the thing being possible.

That is not how the episode depicted it. Sisko spent half the episode babbling about the locusts destroying Bajor after he subjected himself to one of the Orbs. His entire "rationale" was based upon the visions and not intel.

Hmm beings who can see the future and have been proven to have this ability (both by the events they have predicted and by their very nature) start telling you that Bajor (a planet they have an interest in) will be in danger if it joins the Federation, seems like Intel to me.

Visions are not intel. None of the Federationists save Sisko bought into the visions. All they saw was that the negotiations to bring Bajor into the Federation were wrecked. Watch the damn episode.

If a mechanic told me my break lines were cut it would be rather stupid of me to get in my car and drive off don't you think?

And is your mechanic telling you your car will break down based on his actually examining its works, or because he's reading the goat entrails in a hubcap?

You are also missing the fact that Siskos actions here saved Bajor and possibly the Federation.

Hmm, last I remember, the war happened anyway. Bajor was abandoned to the Dominion and occupied for six months. The war lasted two years after that. The only reason Bajor was "saved" had nothing to do with Sisko's babbling about the Locusts but much more through the military incompetence of the Dominion.

You may have brought up three examples but if you examples don't prove anything it dosn't exactly help you case or shall I prove Sisko is a loyal member of Sf because hes good at peeling potatoes?

No, they don't "prove" anything beyond what we actually see in the goddamn show, which is his placing his rapport with the wormhole aliens above that of military necessity to save his nation from a hostile invasion force.

He didn't go off on a "vision quest" as you put it and he didn't resign his comission, he was given a leave of absence after his friend died and he failed in his duty to SF which was what bothered him the most

Sisko: I've failed as the Emissary and,
for the first time in my life,
I've failed in my duty as a
Starfleet officer.

Now while I don't agree with letting have leave whenever he wants during a war if he wasn't in his right mind hes better off not in command.

Two plot synopses:

"Images In The Sand": Concerned primarily with the efforts of Sisko to repair the damage done by a crazed Gul Dukat in releasing the pah-wraiths into the wormhole, this tedious outing traces Sisko slowly uncovers evidence that his mother was a prophet and that his entire life has been engineered by these redoubtable gods. Back on DS9, we learn of infighting within the unsteady Federation Alliance as hostilities break out between the Romulans and Bajorans. The installment closes with Sisko convinced that he must travel to Tyree in order to restore the worm hole.

"Shadows And Symbols": Sisko, his father and son Jake, as well as the new Dax host, Ezri, travel to Tyree in the hopes of uncovering the Orb of the Emissary somewhere on its surface. While these four stumble about in the desert, the confrontation between the Romulans and the Bajorans comes to a head and the newly promoted Colonel Kira is forced to employ all of her considerable deviousness to outwit her villainous adversaries. In the story’s comic subplot, Worf and the other underlings of DS9 head out on a Klingon cruiser intent upon destroying a Dominion shipyard in order to earn Jadzia a place in Sto-vo-kor, the Klingon heaven. After some fumbling, they succeed, primarily through luck. Sisko manages to find the Orb of the Emissary and restores the wormhole. His mission fulfilled, he returns to DS9.

http://dominion.tvheaven.com/edit7.html

Kindly tell me how that is not a vision quest.

Its ok saying this is what the series shows us but without specific examples and evidence that backup your claim it doesn't work, I could say its shows us that Humans become 40 foot giants in the future, would you simply take that on faith or would you ask for evidence (or just outright call it a lie)?

Shall I post more plot synopses and episode information which is easily available from numerous print and online guides? Or will you try putting up more bullshit examples about how we can't take things on faith?

[TheDarkling]

The Enterprise E at the time was going around seeking allies (Ref Insurrection), allies as in small little nations not big empires and again this is a red herring SF gave him his orders his carrying them out doesn't show disloyalty.

Military logic belongs in no discussion about the Feds and you know it , seriously though what the Feds should have done has no bearing on Sisko’s loyalty.

I asked for you to prove it was possible to close the wormhole, you can't since O'Brien doesn't think its possible even if it is the fault doesn't lie with Sisko.

I have seen the episode and Sisko believed that aliens that could see the future were telling him something and surprise THEY WERE, by heeding their warning he helped both the Federation and Bajor.

A mechanic examines my car just like the wormhole aliens can examine the future (since they can see it) therefore the wormholes aliens telling Sisko something is going to happen needed consideration.
Now Sisko can go with his gut and take it to be a message from the wormhole aliens or he can ignore it - he goes with his gut and makes the right decision something you seem eager to ignore.

If Bajor had been a Federation member world it would have been occupied and the Federation would have been forced to try and save it (thus meaning the attack SF deemed more important than the wormhole wouldn't have gone ahead).
In the actual timeline Bajor was not occupied but simply switched defence partners from the Feds to the Dominion, therefore Sisko saved Bajor from occupation (and the resistance that would follow which would bring about death and destruction).

You have yet to show him placing his rapport with the wormhole aliens above saving his nation he in fact ignores Bajor prophecy on at least one occasion, defies the prophets at least twice (to go to Chintoka and to get married) and he goes to argue to help get aid for his nation even when the prophets frown on interfering in "the game".

Sisko did not leave SF to go on a vision quest and when he goes to Tyree it is to reopen the wormhole the fact that the orb of the emissary also gives him a vision or two is immaterial.
Also you would do well to actually watch the episode for the parts you highlighted about him finding out about his past all come from his father and have nothing whatsoever to do with visions (he does get one vision of a face but he doesn't actually get any info from a vision quest just saying "hey dad who is this?") or his trip to Tyree.

Given that you just misconstrued an entire episode yes I would actually like to see evidence rather than taking things on faith.

So lets do a recap.
You have three main gripes against Sisko.
1)He follows orders from SF and doesn't destroy the station (yeah following orders = disloyalty alright).
2)He believes his technical advisors when they tell him something cannot be done (and what they cannot be done may not be possible, something you have yet to prove is possible apart from saynig they mUST be wrong because you think they are).
3)He believes his "visions" to be messages from aliens who can see the future and acts on them (and in the process benefiting both the Federation and carrying out his standing orders which is to aid Bajor).
4)When he believes himself unfit to command he has himself releaved of duty instead of carrying on and puting his crew in danger.

Well to me it seems in hasd only acted in a questionable manner in 3 where he went with his instincts (which proved to be correct), all you can say here is he is impulsive or stupid not that he favours Bajor's wellbeing over his nations.
Meanwhile I have given instances where he has gone against the will of the wormhole aliens (infact far more than you have provided) yet you came with an opinion that you have ingrained into yourself (you probably dislike the show or Sisko (which is fair enough) and thus invent these reasons (which isn't).

Its clear you can't backup your claims yet you still cling to them - very odd behaviour indeed.

[Patrick Degan]

The Enterprise E at the time was going around seeking allies (Ref Insurrection), allies as in small little nations not big empires and again this is a red herring SF gave him his orders his carrying them out doesn't show disloyalty.

Sisko was ordered to leave the station to be captured intact by the Dominion? Do kindly quote the episode reference on that one.

As for "seeking allies", small little nations are hardly much of a help in a war with a superpower. You seek your allies among powers with the military force to tip the balance of the war to your side's favour. That is the logic of superpower relations in war, and alliances are forged out of mutual interest and convenience, not P.R. or idealism.

Military logic belongs in no discussion about the Feds and you know it , seriously though what the Feds should have done has no bearing on Sisko’s loyalty.

It does indeed have a bearing if he sacrifices the one certain method for securing the Alpha Quadrant from invasion.

I asked for you to prove it was possible to close the wormhole, you can't since O'Brien doesn't think its possible even if it is the fault doesn't lie with Sisko.

That O'Brien is incapable of thinking of anything other than technowank solutions instead of basic, brute-force solutions is down to his incompetence. I've already demonstrated one possible method for closing the wormhole and a logical one at that.

I have seen the episode and Sisko believed that aliens that could see the future were telling him something and surprise THEY WERE, by heeding their warning he helped both the Federation and Bajor.

Sisko's bablings about the Locusts had zero effect on the unfolding of events, other than to demolish the Bajoran entry into the Federation. Bajor ended up under Dominion rule because Sisko did nothing to prevent the Dominion from flying in reinforcement convoys for months before the outbreak of war. He did a half-assed job of blockading the wormhole access and one which in the end failed when the Cardassians figured out how to overwhelm the mine replication capacity, which was made possible in part because they had access to the station's computers which were rebuilt quickly enough by the Cardassian engineers. Without the intervention of the wormhole aliens, the Federation would have been conquered, but had there been no wormhole, there never would have been the danger of Gamma Quadrant reinforcements in the first place.

A mechanic examines my car just like the wormhole aliens can examine the future (since they can see it) therefore the wormholes aliens telling Sisko something is going to happen needed consideration.
Now Sisko can go with his gut and take it to be a message from the wormhole aliens or he can ignore it - he goes with his gut and makes the right decision something you seem eager to ignore.

I ignore nothing. I said Sisko's mental state was questionable; a condition following his exposure to the Orb of Prophecy. I said that his "vision" was not the same as hard intelligence discovered through observation and surveillance. In other words, actually examining hard evidence. And your pathetic argument that he "went with his gut" and made the decision which saved Bajor is belied by the fact that the planet ended up under Dominion rule anyway.

If Bajor had been a Federation member world it would have been occupied and the Federation would have been forced to try and save it (thus meaning the attack SF deemed more important than the wormhole wouldn't have gone ahead). In the actual timeline Bajor was not occupied but simply switched defence partners from the Feds to the Dominion, therefore Sisko saved Bajor from occupation (and the resistance that would follow which would bring about death and destruction).

"Switched defence partners" in the same way as Vichy France did after the Germans moved in. You still had a Dominion military presence in the Bajoran system, which includes troops. The Bajorans wound up with foreign occupiers once again.

You have yet to show him placing his rapport with the wormhole aliens above saving his nation

I guess not even trying to find a way to collapse the wormhole doesn't qualify as a demonstration.

he in fact ignores Bajor prophecy on at least one occasion, defies the prophets at least twice (to go to Chintoka and to get married)

For which he tries to vision-quest his way back into their favour, as seen in the opening three episodes of season 7.

and he goes to argue to help get aid for his nation even when the prophets frown on interfering in "the game".

A half-point on that one; Sisko convinces the wormhole aliens to intervene, but not for the Federation but rather for Bajor. In this instance, he makes the play that is likely to work (that it was a horrible deus ex-machina is another issue entirely). But on the flip-side, you've got him having to ask the intervention of the wormhole aliens to prevent the Federation's defeat in a war which would not have been imminent or may never even have happened if he had put national interest first and collapsed the wormhole to begin with.

Sisko did not leave SF to go on a vision quest and when he goes to Tyree it is to reopen the wormhole the fact that the orb of the emissary also gives him a vision or two is immaterial.

Even you can't be dense enough not to recognise the metaphor.

Also you would do well to actually watch the episode for the parts you highlighted about him finding out about his past all come from his father and have nothing whatsoever to do with visions (he does get one vision of a face but he doesn't actually get any info from a vision quest just saying "hey dad who is this?") or his trip to Tyree.

That's right, Darkling, try to nitpick the issue to death to avoid facing the rather obvious answer to what Sisko is seeking —to regain the favour of the wormhole aliens.

Given that you just misconstrued an entire episode yes I would actually like to see evidence rather than taking things on faith.

You can't misconstrue what is plain in the episode material. It is you who is trying to find every bullshit exception to deny what Sisko is truly seeking.

You have three main gripes against Sisko.
1)He follows orders from SF and doesn't destroy the station (yeah following orders = disloyalty alright).

He leaves an intact military facility to fall into enemy hands so as not to "upset" the Bajorans. That is placing his role as Emissary over his duty as a Starfleet officer. And while that is not disloyalty, it is certainly a demonstration of conflicted loyalty.

2)He believes his technical advisors when they tell him something cannot be done (and what they cannot be done may not be possible, something you have yet to prove is possible apart from saynig they mUST be wrong because you think they are).

I've pointed out a logical approach to the problem. Kindly outline how a brute-force application of sufficent energy to overcome the wormhole's field stability threshold is unfeasible, please.

3)He believes his "visions" to be messages from aliens who can see the future and acts on them (and in the process benefiting both the Federation and carrying out his standing orders which is to aid Bajor).

Since Bajor wound up a Dominion outpost, the "benefit" you keep yammering on about is questionable to say the least. It's funny to see you standing up and arguing that making decisions based upon psychic visions received while in a questionable mental state is even remotely sensible.

4)When he believes himself unfit to command he has himself releaved of duty instead of carrying on and puting his crew in danger.

He left because he felt he failed as the Emissary first and failed as a Starfleet officer second. His guilt over ignoring the wormhole aliens was the driver of his decisions and not any rational assessment of his command abilities.

Well to me it seems in had only acted in a questionable manner in 3 where he went with his instincts (which proved to be correct), all you can say here is he is impulsive or stupid not that he favours Bajor's wellbeing over his nations.

Only if we ignore the fact that he puts his role as Emissary first, that he will not close off the Bajorans' phone connection to their gods, and pulls himself out of duty during a war of national survival to regain their favour when he feels he's failed as Pope Sisko I.

Meanwhile I have given instances where he has gone against the will of the wormhole aliens (infact far more than you have provided) yet you came with an opinion that you have ingrained into yourself (you probably dislike the show or Sisko (which is fair enough) and thus invent these reasons (which isn't).

It is an opinion which is based upon what is actually in the TV show. Just as my opinion about the workings of gravity is based upon how it actually affects me.

Its clear you can't backup your claims yet you still cling to them - very odd behaviour indeed.

"Can't back my claims"? Oh, that's rich. All I have to do is keep pointing out the actual episode material for however long you wish to keep up composing your apologia for this series.

[Sea Skimmer]

None felt even remotely real to me.

[TheDarkling]

The Enterprise E at the time was going around seeking allies (Ref Insurrection), allies as in small little nations not big empires and again this is a red herring SF gave him his orders his carrying them out doesn't show disloyalty.

Sisko was ordered to leave the station to be captured intact by the Dominion? Do kindly quote the episode reference on that one.

Sisko contacts SF and they tell him he isn't getting any backup, I'm also pretty sure at this point he was given his orders on what to do (they knew holding the station wasn't going to happen without more ships).
Or do you think SF simply didn't give him any orders on what to do although they did tell him all about why he couldn't have any ships.

The we move onto the fact that even if it was his choice (since you are acting like some wayward AI from TOS and shouting "does not compute" no the issue of SF actually giving orders) and I can't possibly understand how it could be there were still reasons for him not to do it (I'm sure killing neutrals in a war and destroying their civilians and personel is against some Federation codes of conduct).

As for "seeking allies", small little nations are hardly much of a help in a war with a superpower. You seek your allies among powers with the military force to tip the balance of the war to your side's favour. That is the logic of superpower relations in war, and alliances are forged out of mutual interest and convenience, not P.R. or idealism.

Yes and going around blowing up your allies installations is going to encourage people to sign up even the Dominion got this concept which is why they treated Bajor correctly.

Military logic belongs in no discussion about the Feds and you know it , seriously though what the Feds should have done has no bearing on Sisko’s loyalty.

It does indeed have a bearing if he sacrifices the one certain method for securing the Alpha Quadrant from invasion.

and he does this when again?

I asked for you to prove it was possible to close the wormhole, you can't since O'Brien doesn't think its possible even if it is the fault doesn't lie with Sisko.

That O'Brien is incapable of thinking of anything other than technowank solutions instead of basic, brute-force solutions is down to his incompetence. I've already demonstrated one possible method for closing the wormhole and a logical one at that.

Yes and subspace conforms to the laws of our universe... oh no wait.
and again you can't possibly atribute this to Sisko but you just seem to want to attack anything and everything to do with DS9 (you can see this right?).
O'Brien's incompentence (which again you still can't prove since his knowledge of wormholes outranks yours (there is a common tendancy among certain people here to rate their opinon about canon fact, if O'Brien says it can't be destroyed and you can't prove it can be then the fact stands)).

I have seen the episode and Sisko believed that aliens that could see the future were telling him something and surprise THEY WERE, by heeding their warning he helped both the Federation and Bajor.

Sisko's bablings about the Locusts had zero effect on the unfolding of events, other than to demolish the Bajoran entry into the Federation. Bajor ended up under Dominion rule because Sisko did nothing to prevent the Dominion from flying in reinforcement convoys for months before the outbreak of war. He did a half-assed job of blockading the wormhole access and one which in the end failed when the Cardassians figured out how to overwhelm the mine replication capacity, which was made possible in part because they had access to the station's computers which were rebuilt quickly enough by the Cardassian engineers. Without the intervention of the wormhole aliens, the Federation would have been conquered, but had there been no wormhole, there never would have been the danger of Gamma Quadrant reinforcements in the first place.

Yet again you expound on the wormhole being there is his fault, you have to PROVE this first and you havent been able to but only complain about O'Brien, which has no bearing on Sisko.
If Bajor had entered the Federation it would have had a very rough time compared to not having any troops on Bajor at all (you are either ignoring facts through dishonesty, stupidity or because you are so hell bent on being right you can't think straight).

You failed to address the point but continued to whine about the wormhole something which hacve still yet to prove displayed what you say it displayed (or even proved that the wormhole could have been destroyed).

Then the fact that you think Sisko should have mined the wormhole off his own back without getting orders (which in effect means Sisko declares war on the Dominion without his governments say so) is insane - please look at where this crusade agsint Sisko is taking you.

A mechanic examines my car just like the wormhole aliens can examine the future (since they can see it) therefore the wormholes aliens telling Sisko something is going to happen needed consideration.
Now Sisko can go with his gut and take it to be a message from the wormhole aliens or he can ignore it - he goes with his gut and makes the right decision something you seem eager to ignore.

I ignore nothing. I said Sisko's mental state was questionable; a condition following his exposure to the Orb of Prophecy. I said that his "vision" was not the same as hard intelligence discovered through observation and surveillance. In other words, actually examining hard evidence. And your pathetic argument that he "went with his gut" and made the decision which saved Bajor is belied by the fact that the planet ended up under Dominion rule anyway.

OK at this pouint I have to ask if you saw the show - Bajor didn't end up under Dominion rule anymore than it was under federation rule before hand - not noe Jem Hadar set foot omn Bajor, the government still ruled the planet and control of the station was shared as it was before.
If Bajor had been a Federation world it would have had troops ladning on it and it would have been placed under Dominion rule, the differance is between the setup they had with the Federation or the cardassian occupation - please tell me you either didn't watch the show or simply forgot because assuming the two setups are similiar is extreme idiocy.

You can complain about his mental state whihc may have been questionable but he acted on intel from aliens in the know and he DID make the right call.

If Bajor had been a Federation member world it would have been occupied and the Federation would have been forced to try and save it (thus meaning the attack SF deemed more important than the wormhole wouldn't have gone ahead). In the actual timeline Bajor was not occupied but simply switched defence partners from the Feds to the Dominion, therefore Sisko saved Bajor from occupation (and the resistance that would follow which would bring about death and destruction).

"Switched defence partners" in the same way as Vichy France did after the Germans moved in. You still had a Dominion military presence in the Bajoran system, which includes troops. The Bajorans wound up with foreign occupiers once again.

No troops set foot on Bajor (in fact after 3 months there was an uproar about 40 unarmed Vorta heading onto the lpanet) and on many ocassions Weyoun told Dukat that the Dominion had to honour its treaty and respect Bajors independance to prove they could be trusted to the AQ.

Again choice between the setup they had with teh Federation (sharing defense of Bajor and the station) compared to being occupied like the were by the Cardassians, if you can't see the distinction there is something wrong smewhere and if you can't see tjhat Sisko saved lives then I fear there is no hope for you.

You have yet to show him placing his rapport with the wormhole aliens above saving his nation

I guess not even trying to find a way to collapse the wormhole doesn't qualify as a demonstration.

His technical crew said it wasn't possible, he believed them and the people with the most understanding of wormhole physics would have been given the task of figuring out how to collapse it - that is outside Sisko purview and is done to the federation science council (or actually the trill science council who came up with the orignal plan).

he in fact ignores Bajor prophecy on at least one occasion, defies the prophets at least twice (to go to Chintoka and to get married)

For which he tries to vision-quest his way back into their favour, as seen in the opening three episodes of season 7.

No he tries to help out the wormhole aliens because they got injured on his watch and he felt respnosible (which to a degree he was).

and he goes to argue to help get aid for his nation even when the prophets frown on interfering in "the game".

A half-point on that one; Sisko convinces the wormhole aliens to intervene, but not for the Federation but rather for Bajor. In this instance, he makes the play that is likely to work (that it was a horrible deus ex-machina is another issue entirely). But on the flip-side, you've got him having to ask the intervention of the wormhole aliens to prevent the Federation's defeat in a war which would not have been imminent or may never even have happened if he had put national interest first and collapsed the wormhole to begin with.

He can't collapse the wormhole stop stating your self deluding fantasy as fact, he tried, he failed and then it was out of his hands.

Sisko did not leave SF to go on a vision quest and when he goes to Tyree it is to reopen the wormhole the fact that the orb of the emissary also gives him a vision or two is immaterial.

Even you can't be dense enough not to recognise the metaphor.

Well Im not the one who can't tell the differance between an occupation and an alliance.

I care not about the metaphor - it wasn't a vision quest (you use that term as a subtle attack on Sisko) it was the use of a communication device to contact some aliens and aid them in winning a battle, nothing more.

Also you would do well to actually watch the episode for the parts you highlighted about him finding out about his past all come from his father and have nothing whatsoever to do with visions (he does get one vision of a face but he doesn't actually get any info from a vision quest just saying "hey dad who is this?") or his trip to Tyree.

That's right, Darkling, try to nitpick the issue to death to avoid facing the rather obvious answer to what Sisko is seeking —to regain the favour of the wormhole aliens.

You sayy this but where is your proof? you have this built up version of Sisko in your head but I think this thread has shown that your idea of Sisko (and Trek in general probably) bares nothing in common with actual trek and is not based in canon.

Given that you just misconstrued an entire episode yes I would actually like to see evidence rather than taking things on faith.

You can't misconstrue what is plain in the episode material. It is you who is trying to find every bullshit exception to deny what Sisko is truly seeking.

If its that obvious then it shouldn't be too hard to prove it - he wants to correct his errors sure but regain favour? I can't recall seeing him ever grasp for favuor with the wormhole aliens however you must have a wealth of evidence to present and I await this well thought out case.

You have three main gripes against Sisko.
1)He follows orders from SF and doesn't destroy the station (yeah following orders = disloyalty alright).

He leaves an intact military facility to fall into enemy hands so as not to "upset" the Bajorans. That is placing his role as Emissary over his duty as a Starfleet officer. And while that is not disloyalty, it is certainly a demonstration of conflicted loyalty.

Except he had orders on what to do and would have probably have been going against SF rules if he were to destroy a neutrals property (and he sure as hell would have failed in his mission to bring Bajor into the the Federation).

2)He believes his technical advisors when they tell him something cannot be done (and what they cannot be done may not be possible, something you have yet to prove is possible apart from saynig they mUST be wrong because you think they are).

I've pointed out a logical approach to the problem. Kindly outline how a brute-force application of sufficent energy to overcome the wormhole's field stability threshold is unfeasible, please.

I havent the faintest idea how artificially created wormholes function (in trek or otherwise) O'Brien does and he makes it cleart it can't be doen now lets see - O'Brien has studied wormholes, lives next door to one, has traveled through one.
You - thinks it should work against what a canon character states.

Your opinion < O'Briens statement (CANON)

3)He believes his "visions" to be messages from aliens who can see the future and acts on them (and in the process benefiting both the Federation and carrying out his standing orders which is to aid Bajor).

Since Bajor wound up a Dominion outpost, the "benefit" you keep yammering on about is questionable to say the least. It's funny to see you standing up and arguing that making decisions based upon psychic visions received while in a questionable mental state is even remotely sensible.

Not its isn't questionable its obvious to anyone with a brain , Alliance or occupation.
Psychic visions no however the Wormhole aliens do communicate in this manner and it has been shown they know the future and you keep dodging the fact he made the correct call.

4)When he believes himself unfit to command he has himself releaved of duty instead of carrying on and puting his crew in danger.

He left because he felt he failed as the Emissary first and failed as a Starfleet officer second. His guilt over ignoring the wormhole aliens was the driver of his decisions and not any rational assessment of his command abilities.

He states that he failed as both and the fact he failed for the first time ever as a SF officier seems to bother him more however thats just me opinion (see how I seperated that from fact).
He felt guilty because his ignoring he wormhole aliens lead to the death of his friend and harming of an entire race of people (the wormhole aliens), he sort a way to rectify his mistake which he did however it is clear that with the guilt he didn't feel upto command and having someone with unresolved issues that may affect his judgement in command isn't a good idea.

Well to me it seems in had only acted in a questionable manner in 3 where he went with his instincts (which proved to be correct), all you can say here is he is impulsive or stupid not that he favours Bajor's wellbeing over his nations.

Only if we ignore the fact that he puts his role as Emissary first, that he will not close off the Bajorans' phone connection to their gods, and pulls himself out of duty during a war of national survival to regain their favour when he feels he's failed as Pope Sisko I.

You haven't proved it was to regain their favour and you admit yourself guilt is a factor further up - make up your mind please.
You also have yet to prove he had the chocie to close the wormhole and didn't so please stop stating it as if you have proved it, I can prove that when he does have the choice he goes for it (Ref In purgatories Shadow) so please show you evidence (this is only the what? third time I have asked).

[/quote]

Meanwhile I have given instances where he has gone against the will of the wormhole aliens (infact far more than you have provided) yet you came with an opinion that you have ingrained into yourself (you probably dislike the show or Sisko (which is fair enough) and thus invent these reasons (which isn't).

It is an opinion which is based upon what is actually in the TV show. Just as my opinion about the workings of gravity is based upon how it actually affects me.[/quote]

If it were rooted in canon bedrock you wouldn't be having such a hard time proving it.

Its clear you can't backup your claims yet you still cling to them - very odd behaviour indeed.

"Can't back my claims"? Oh, that's rich. All I have to do is keep pointing out the actual episode material for however long you wish to keep up composing your apologia for this series.

Yes all you have to down is point out episodes then twist what actually happens (Sisko wishes to regain favour) ignore what is actually said (O'Brien staes its not possible but you gloss over this) or simply forget (the incidents I have put forward that clash with your assement).

I have to wonder how long I shuld sit here and watch you state black is white over and over agian before I tire before your wall of ignorance (the fact that you blame Sisko for not closing the wormhole when he tried and failed and then was informed it culdn't be done shows you seem to have departed the land of reason a few miles back).

[Biddybot]

I used to review DS9 and VOY for a local Trek newsletter and made the disclaimer then that I considered TNG and VOY as space adventures and DS9 a space drama, as much akin to hospital and police dramas as it was to SF. So yes, in the human sense, I always thought of DS9 as the most 'real' of the trio.

It was losing its foothold in real-life reality that put me off DS9 in the later years of its run, actually. Stuff like Worf being upset and living aboard the Defiant and Sisko NOT losing his security clearance for getting chummy with a convicted felon used to just drive me nuts!