quote:Originally posted by Sol System: One alleged purpose of using stardates, though, is that they provide a universal timekeeping standard across the vast reaches of Federation space.
That's what I'm saying though, is that this is a huge mistake. They don't. The sooner people accept that, the better. (Sorry to sound so overzealous, but I'm really getting tired of these deabates on stardate inconsistancies and people trying to make more of them than was ever intended by TPTB.)
quote:Originally posted by TSN: If stardates aren't constant from place to place, they're useless.
posted
Roddenberry's statement though was him merely coming up with a way of covering mistakes with stardates with tech talk. It's really, really apparent that stardates are suppossed to be chronological, that they are consistent across space, and that, since TNG started, 1000 = 1 year.
Even the messed up TNG season 1 stardates are in some sort of order. If you planted them on a graph, you'd get a roughly increasing line, not a random series of dots.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I think there are two seperate lines of argument here. One is that stardates are often not what they should be. The other is that, these mistakes aside, stardates are "really" universal and usable. These don't really seem to be in conflict.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
