They need to take a break, develop new stories and then come back with a brand new kick ass series about three or four years after Voyager ends. I have said this before, but I think the new series should be set in the future - this will give the writers scope to do what they want.

------------------
Do business with us, or we'll ruin you.

***** Are you all out of your Vulcan minds? *****

I wonder if one can seriously call oneself a sci-fi fan, Trek fan, Trekkie, Trekker or whatever, but demand A BREAK FROM TREK. In my opinion, if you think you love something but it's dispensable you don't really love it. What about your girl/boy friends?

If you are so critical about the show that you prefer to not see it for a while, please consider if you are still a Trek fan. I can understand that fans are trying to care about the business of TPTB (after all I do as well), but isn't it paradox to tell them "please stop making my favorite show"? I admit I'm a Trek addict, and I couldn't stand three years without Trek on TV. What is this Trek renunciation supposed to mean anyway - besides the reasonable arguments - a personal sacrifice, a sign you're not addicted but live in the real world?

And now back to reasonable arguments: Is Trek supposed to become better (still better?) after the break? If Trek is stopped after VOY season 7 or even 6, there will be no continuity. Who knows if the new production team will make a good show in 3 or even five years? Rick Berman is not so bad a producer as some might think, but I'm not sure if he will be back. The same applies to most of the other people. Who will care about consistency? When TNG started, Roddenberry was still around, and he did a good job.

Starting a new show is always a whole lot of work for numerous people, and it's even harder if it called Star Trek and expectations are high and it's still harder if there's no direct predecessor. Will it be Trek at all or only be called Star Trek?

Will there be a new show at all? TPTB could come to the conclusion that the whole business works without any new investments. Why spend millions of dollars for a new show, if the mercahndising still runs perfectly (George Lucas was aware of that, don't tell Paramount)?

I don't want to think of the worst case - oblivion. There will probably be several new appealing sci-fi shows in the meantime, and Star Trek will not exactly be forgotten, but regarded as "the good old thing our parents always watched". It was a great and unexpected success that TNG did not only manage to pick up, but also revive the idea of Star Trek. I wouldn't risk to skip one generation (of fans) again. The young people (to which most of you obviously belong, while I'm quite a bit older) are much more ambitious, fastidious and daring than my generation, and they change their minds continually. Don't show them any Star Trek, they won't miss it. Show them Star Trek, they will like it or not. As long as there are people interested in it, Star Trek will continue, and I hope it will be forever.

Star Trek: Live long and prosper!

------------------
WHO ARE YOU?

Yes, we're Star Trek fans - but we're DISCERNING Star Trek fans. We know when an episode or movie is crap, and we've been seeing more of such as time goes on. If you're so blind to quality that you have no judgement at all about what you see, then what are you doing here? This isn't a Forum for saying "gosh, wasn't that episode brilliant?" the day after you saw "Meridian" or "Threshold" or "Shades of Grey" or "Spock's Brain."

All the above won't be the case if Star Trek is stopped now.

------------------
WHO ARE YOU?

TOS actually was pretty cheezy, often times sexist. But a few of the shows were really good because a few of the writers were very good, and were reflecting on the ideas and thought of the '60s.

TNG really was pretty good. It was good because the writers were good. TNG barellly even scratched the surface with their characters, yet they were able to create fresh and new and quality stories every week. TNG was actually the most commercially popular trek series.

DS9 did get off to a slow start, u have to admit. But with the coming of the dominion, the show developed its conflict and character driven story lines. Complex story arcs were formed throughout the series. This led to a spectacular 6th and 7th seasons of what is regarded as perhaps the best trek. But we have to notice that DS9 was good because it had good writers, and ira behr has its brilliant producer.

Then came Voyager. Voyager, to put it nicely, did not compare with TNG or DS9. Although Voyager's stories could often times be exciting and sometimes intereting, I often found them shallow. This is because Voyager's writers aren't all the best, and Voyager's producer insits on making each show stand alone.

The reason TNG and DS9 were good was because they had good writers. Voyager might not be as good because its writers are not always as good, and its producer has a different vision for the series.

I personnaly believe that the next seres could do fine if:

1) The characters have potantial to grow and interact.

2) Good writers are brought in to work on the show.

3)An experienced trek producer is chosen who can perhaps find the balance between characters and plot. What this balance should be depends on your own views. I personally think an intermdeiate point between DS9 and TNG would be good. Some of u might want a series similar to DS9, while tohers might want one closer to TNG.