-Phil wondered in the NextGen Guide II if Starfleet command was ticked at Picard for causing Q to hurl the Enterprise across the galaxy to encounter the Borg in "Q Who?", thereby making the Borg aware of the Federation's existence and compelling them to attack Earth in "BOBW". But in the "Star Trek Encyclopedia", it says that the Borg cube in "Q Who?" was on its way to the Alpha Quadrant. But "Q Who?" implies that the Borg didn't know the federation existed until Q sent the Enterprise to J-25. So is it really Picard's fault? Would "BOBW" have happened if the crew hadn't encountered the Borg in "Q Who?"

-Also, I realize the Borg were in their early stages of conception in "Q Who?", but Q himself says that the Borg aren't interested in humanity, all they want is the ship. Then, when they come for Picatd in "BOBW", Shelby notes the disparity and Picard simply says, "Their priorities seem to have changed." From "BOBW" onward, the Borg are always more interested in assimilating life forms than technology (because if you assimilate a race, you get their technology anyway). There is no mention of assimilation in "Q Who?". Now, why did the Borg's priorities change?

-As Phil said in TNG Guide II, the final scene in "Lonely Among Us" with the Antican wanting to eat the Selay ambassador (or was it the other way around?) and Picard/Riker being nonchalant about it is just....bizarre. The crew seems selective about which life forms they will show compassion to.

-Anyone ever hear the unused TNG title theme? (I think it's on the "Farpoint" soundtrack) Although I like the one we've got better, it is a nice theme, even if it is a bit too "Star-Warsy". Strains of this theme are used in the background in some of the early 1st season episodes (Like the final scene in "Farpoint" and "The Naked Now". At least they didn't let it go to waste.)

-I wonder what ever happened to Hugh and his rogue Borg after "Descent"? I heard there was an episode slated for the 7th season that would deal with that, but they scrapped it.

-As Phil said in TNG Guide II, the final scene in "Lonely Among Us" with the Antican wanting to eat the Selay ambassador (or was it the other way around?) and Picard/Riker being nonchalant about it is just....bizarre. The crew seems selective about which life forms they will show compassion to.

I always figured that since both sides had been trying to kill each other for the whole ep Picard figured that "those who live by the sword die by the sword" I wasn't like one side was being bullied and dominated by the other

I dunno, Brian, I'm having trouble with the notion of Picard thinking in terms of 'He who lives by the sword.'
And even if he was inclined to view it that way...the Antican and Selay parties are aboard his ship, under his protection so to speak, being ferried to a Federation-sponsored conference.
You'd think that - before the two hostile races were brought together - some sort of first-contact security briefing would have been supplied containing this cultural detail. (After all, it's not like either race is hiding it...) And that, in acting on that briefing, Yar - and ultimately Picard - would've taken all possible precautions to prevent any trouble between the two parties.

-In "Descent Part I", Nechayev chews Picard out for not using the invasive program on Hugh in "I, Borg". But as it turns out, it probably wouldn't have had much of a significant effect anyway. After Hugh took his sense of individuality back to the Collective, only his immediate sect of Borg (a pretty large number to be sure, but negligible compared to the entire Collective) were affected. So the invasive program would probably only wipe out that section of the Borg. Agree? Disagree?

-According to First Contact, the temperature inside a Borg cube is 39.1 degrees celsius; very hot and humid. But in "Q Who?" and "BOBW", the interior of the Cubes don't seem abnormally hot or humid. The human crew who board the Borg cubes in those episodes aren't sweating profusely, anyway. Then again, maybe someone was messing with the Thermostat.

-I'm sure many will agree with me that the Enterprise-D's destruction in Generations was a real fluke. This ship had survived three encounters with the Borg, a natural disaster, assault by dozens of different enemy ships, standoffs at the Neutral Zone, trips into altered realities and in the end, it's the DURAS SISTERS and the I.K.S. Rustbucket that ends up making the kill. I know this is an old subject, beaten to death, but still.

-As Phil asked, how is it that Worf is back to active duty almost right away after major surgery in "Ethics"? Or that Picard is back on track instantly after what to him was an entire lifetime in "The Inner Light"?

-And is true that certain movies/episodes/etc. aren't canon, most notably Star Trek V? I thought everything that happens onscreen ( thereby discounting novels, fanfics, etc.)is canon. What else besides ST5 is in dispute?

-In "Descent Part I", Nechayev chews Picard out for not using the invasive program on Hugh in "I, Borg". But as it turns out, it probably wouldn't have had much of a significant effect anyway. After Hugh took his sense of individuality back to the Collective, only his immediate sect of Borg (a pretty large number to be sure, but negligible compared to the entire Collective) were affected. So the invasive program would probably only wipe out that section of the Borg. Agree? Disagree?

Personally, that's where (regardless of ST:FC) I'd like to think the Borg Queen came from.

-And is true that certain movies/episodes/etc. aren't canon, most notably Star Trek V? I thought everything that happens onscreen ( thereby discounting novels, fanfics, etc.)is canon. What else besides ST5 is in dispute?

I've heard that some producers have wished that ST5 was not cannon but I don't think that anyone has ever said that it was non-cannon. They don't count the animated series, even though DC Fontana thinks that they should.

I think Gene Roddenberry once said that he considered parts of STV to be apocryphal (probably the Sybok and "center of the galaxy" things).

Too bad. Paramount put it on the screen, it's canon. To be honest, I'd like to see TAS considered canon as well.

I've never quite understood why TAS isn't canon. There's nothing in it that directly contradicts the established Trek universe (is there? Are they upset because Larry Niven stuck his K'zin in one ep?) and it actually provides some nice extra glimpses of the tribbles, Harry Mudd and the inner workings of the 'Shore Leave' planet.

The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is the Bonaventure instead of the Phoenix in "The Time Trap".

Also, is the *OFFICIAL* Trek website considered canon? If so, then TAS has to be canon, since it's on there!

I consider TAS to be canon as you are quite correct there is nothing to counter any previously established episode (that i remember at least) and it stays with the look and feel of the trek universe.

My theory regarding the borg has always gone like this:
El-Aurian homeworld destroyed by borg
El-Aurian refugee ships 'rescued' by Enterprise-B
El-Aurians tell of the destruction of their planet and of the 'borg' who did it
Federation bureaucrat fills away report
Report gathers dust
Hansens dig up report go off to find the borg
Borg assimilates them
Borg send cube out to alpha quadrant to assmilate humanity
Borg cube destroys federation and romulan outposts The Neutral Zone
Enterprise catapulted out to sector J-25 has freak encounter with different borg cube Q Who
Borg cube destroys Jouret IV BoBW
Picard and crew come to stop it, yada yada yada

Personally I think there should've been only three borg episodes, q who, bobw and i borg. All the others after that...
And though ST:FC was good, I didn't like what they did to the borg. I liked them better when they were a hive-mind collective.

Exactly. I mean, I think the 'one touch and you're assimilated' feature the Borg had in ST:FC was cool, but I think the whole Borg Queen shtick was just contrived. She can be bargained with, and worse yet, she has emotions! Part of what made the Borg so sinister is that they couldn't be reasoned with; your only options were fight back or run for your life. And as many have said, having only to kill the Queen to wipe out all of the Borg on the ship, again, makes the Borg just a bit less threatening. In the creators' defense though, seeing as the crew barely survived their previous encounters with the Borg (Q had to intervene in Q Who? and the ship was a few hits away from blowing up when Data put the Borg to sleep in BOBW) it is reasonable that they'd offset the Borg's near indestructability just a tad.

Also, it's interesting how, in the battle with the Cube in FC, Picard was able to use his knowledge of the Borg against them in kind of a reversal of Wolf 359.

I realize that many people won't consider the novels to be canon, but I've got to get a bit of silliness of my chest, after reading Ann Crispin's novel, "The Eyes Of The Beholders'. It was a decent book, but she established that Will Riker lost his virginity at age 15 to an extremely beautiful woman that was pushing 40, which led to a relationship that lasted for 3 and a half years, and where they also went to a bar and drank synthehol. I'm sure cultural changes will occur in the next 300 years, but Will was still a minor, and to believe that she'd stick with a kid all this time pushes logic and believability. And drinking synthehol under-age, although not real alcohol, is pretty bad, considering there'd be nothing to stop him from wanting to try the real stuff, again, under-age.
Then there's the blind Andorian orphan girl on the Enterprise (her parents were killed during the events of 'Q-Who?' when the Borg ripped a chunk of the hull out). She's about 8 years old, and runs away with some family jewels to sell as a means to support herself. An 8-year girl trying to pawn valuable gems won't atract attention at the Starbase where the Enterprise is docked?! Am I missing something here, or does this writer seem to have trouble distinguishing the difference between adults and childhood?

And drinking synthehol under-age, although not real alcohol, is pretty bad, considering there'd be nothing to stop him from wanting to try the real stuff, again, under-age.

That's a US-centric perspective. In France it is normal for kids to drink wine with dinner. The idea of a drinking age as we know it does not exist for them.

but Will was still a minor, and to believe that she'd stick with a kid all this time pushes logic and believability.

Same thing here. In some other cultures today a 40 year old and a 15 year old wouldn't cause any alarm, except for the fact that usualy it would be the guy who was 40. I knew a girl (who I think was from Korea) who was 13 dating a 20something year old and her parents were OK with it because by that age in their country it would have been time to merry her off. For another example the reason that Roman Polanski was not returned to the US to face charges for statuitory rape when he flead to france is because they don't think that what he did was a crime (BTW she was 13 & once the British did crash a casting session for one of his movies that was happening in England with the plan of returning him to the US. But he did not come to England for the casting because he knew that they did consider what he did to be a crime)

It still seems like we've got it right and Europeans are wrong, when it comes to sexual relations with a kid of age 15. There's no maturity there, and frankly, a 40-something woman (with a 21-year old son)doing it with a 15-year old boy is gross to me. Age 25 would be my limit. 15-year old Riker, is just about to attend the Academy, but he's still just a kid for the next 3 and a half years that the relationship lasted.
Were this story about Troi losing her virginity at age 15 to a 40-something old man, I think the reaction would be mostly negative.
As for French kids drinking booze at an early age, it still isn't right. American kids get drunk at parties and that's usually considered wrong; the fact that French kids might do the same, but at the dinner table is a double standard; alcoholism is not something to be encouraged at any age.

No, the French have it right about alcohol. By not making it "forbidden fruit", the binging is lowered. When was the last time that you went and binged on milk?

Let me rephrase that (since at various times in my past, I've been known to down a half-gallon of the stuff at a time...)

When was the last time you went and binged on milk, for "fun"?

It still seems like we've got it right and Europeans are wrong, when it comes to sexual relations with a kid of age 15. There's no maturity there, and frankly, a 40-something woman (with a 21-year old son)doing it with a 15-year old boy is gross to me

We're not argueing right vs wrong. We're arguing possible vs impossible. It doesn't matter who's morality you consider right. I was just pointing out that you took 21st century American ideas and said that you can't imagine them changing that much 300 years so I pointed out that many people on Earth today don't share those ideas.

When was the last time you went and binged on milk, for "fun"? ScottN

Well, I guess some people have fun with the "gallon challenge", to drink an entire gallon of milk in under an hour, then try to keep it down. It's said to be impossible. I wouldn't know, cuz I'm not crazy enough to try.

Bingeing on milk. LOL! :-)

Hey...if it's chocolate milk, bring it on.

That sounds like something Counselor Troi would say.

Re. 'The French have it right. By not making it 'forbidden fruit' the binging is lowered'
I guess that's news to all the French alcoholics out there. Maybe if they didn't drink so much wine the Nazis wouldn't have conqueored them so easily, and they wouldn't be so rude to tourists.

Hey, the Germans conquered France because of (French) military incompetence and the Vichy regime. Ordinary French people fought valiantly against the Germans in the resistance. And alcoholism is a lot lower in France then it is America. A glass of wine at meals won't hurt kids or get them drunk. In fact the French have a lower heart disease rate because of this (Also a worse liver disease but hey, you can't have everything). About them being rude to tourists, that's a european thing, not a wine thing.
In summary: By not glamorizing alcohol as something mysterious and forbidden French children aren't as inclined to go binge drinking when they get to college.

Thanks, Makgraf, Your summary was the point I was trying to make.

Hic.