"Admiral" Janeway's worst screw-up?

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:58 pm

The bottom line is, "so what?" Your superior doesn't have to be nice to you - his only responsibility is to tell you what to do. Some may feel that "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," as do I, but that's hardly REQUIRED.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:33 pm

Mikey wrote:The bottom line is, "so what?" Your superior doesn't have to be nice to you - his only responsibility is to tell you what to do. Some may feel that "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," as do I, but that's hardly REQUIRED.

The bottom line is - you've missed the point!

I never said your superior has to be nice to you.

I said there are no nice people in Starfleet's admiralty. Whether that is because of reason 'x' or reason 'y' is irrelevant. They still aren't nice.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:14 pm

Its one of Starfleet's main flaws, which by the way, there are to many to count so please don't start on a list, that would end very badly i feel.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:24 pm

Thorin wrote:
When? The only time I recall her and Picard going head-to-head was in "Descent", after Picard passed up a golden opportunity to inflict aerious, possibly fatal, damage on the Borg ("I, Borg").
Which she held an unprofessional grudge for.

She gave Picard a well-deserved bollocking for putting his own feelings ahead of the security of the Federation and subsequently displayed a lack of trust in his demonstrably flawed judgement.

Who had ignored very strong advice to back off, and taken an unarmed ship into hostile territory to look for something that didn't exist.
Again, this is after everything had happened. Before it had, he still wasn't nice towards him. Treating him as an old fool.

Which he was. Not only was he suffering from a serious neurological disease, but he was claiming that something that didn't even exist was about to prevent life from ever appearing on Earth. Put those two facts together and it's hardly surprising that Riker was skeptical.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:35 pm

Thorin wrote:Whether that is because of reason 'x' or reason 'y' is irrelevant. They still aren't nice.

Huh? Why are you responding to an argument I didn't make? I never mentioned anything about reasons or causes, nor did I disagree with your assessment. You're right - the reason is irrelevant. But nobody ever said it wasn't.

Post by **Teaos** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 12:40 pm

The situation on a ship 70 years away from home that in all likelyhood wont make it home is different to a normal ship. She did need to be nice.

Post by **Mikey** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 2:44 pm

Teaos wrote:The situation on a ship 70 years away from home that in all likelyhood wont make it home is different to a normal ship. She did need to be nice.

Huh? We were talking about the admiralty in general.

Bryan Moore · Post by **Bryan Moore** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:19 am

Didn't saving the Ocampa violate the prime directive in the first place?

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:22 pm

The Ocampa existing at all violates biology. That race was screwed long before the Caretaker or the Kazon ever showed up.

JudgeKing · Post by **JudgeKing** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 1:04 am

Being aloud to live at all.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 1:33 am

JudgeKing wrote:Being aloud to live at all.

That's not her mistake, though, that's everyone who's ever known of her existance's mistake.

mwhittington · Post by **mwhittington** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 2:48 am

Admiral Ross from Starbase 375 was a Starfleet admiral who didn't have a stick up his butt, but was very efficient. In fact, he was friendly to Captain Sisko.