Star Trek Social Club
r/startrek: The Next Generation
Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...
Maybe a little slash fic.
Rules
1 Be constructive
All posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.
2 Be welcoming
It is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.
3 Be truthful
All posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.
4 Be nice
If a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.
5 Spoilers
Utilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.
6 Keep on-topic
All submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.
7 Meta
Questions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.
Upcoming Episodes
| Date | Episode | Title |
|---|---|---|
| 02-19 | SFA 1x07 | "Ko’Zeine" |
| 02-26 | SFA 1x08 | "The Life of the Stars" |
| 03-05 | SFA 1x09 | "300th Night" |
| 03-12 | SFA 1x10 | "Rubincon" |
| TBA | SNW 4x01 | TBA |
In Production
Strange New Worlds (TBA)
In Development
Untitled comedy series
Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.
view the rest of the comments
SFA has a metacritic user score of 1.7 "overwhelming dislike"
Honestly surprised that you would cite such a transparently manipulated crowd-sourced rating.
Especially when the Rotten Tomatoes pro critic score is 88% — far above the ‘review bombed’ audience score.
Also, it seems you’re unaware that the review bombing was so bad that it’s been having a ‘Streisand Effect’ raising the profile of the show.
When a show or movie has a distribution has a stack of 1/10 “worst show ever” votes and a fairly flat distribution otherwise, it’s clearly not showing votes of people who have seen it.
The IMDb profile is particularly revealing. The overall rating of the show is low 4.4, with lots of 1/10s, but the ratings of the actual episodes run from 4.7 to 7.0 with an average for the episodes over 6 — despite some continuing review bombing.
Here’s the obviously review bombed distribution of votes for the show overall.
Here’s the crowdsourced vote distribution for episode 10
The brigading by review bombers who never watched the show but claim they “saw some reviews on YouTube and know all they need to” got so completely out of hand that the people who have done this have made the situation into a pop psychology meme. Psychology Today even wrote a feature article “The Trouble with Review Bombing” about it.
I also note that haverholm has linked the Flix Patrol rankings that show that SFA drew much more audience on platforms other than Paramount+ — which suggests it’s doing its jog in attracting new audiences.
do you have proof of review bombing? your reasoning for it not being actual reviews seems thin at best. who do you think is doing it? and why?
can I also ask why you put weight in IMDb but ignore metacritic? it's just an aggregation site after all.
rereading you comment it seems that you feel that reviews of the show don't count unless those people also review each episode individually? I'm not sure why you think that though? most people aren't going to continue watching a show they don't like so why would they then continue to review each episode?
edit: spelling and clarity
That distribution of reviews tells the story.
An honest distribution of views of people who had watched at least one entire episode would not rate with 1/10 = the worst show they had ever watched.
Not to mention that there are many people posting in other places that “they don’t need see it to know it’s awful” and that they are “campaigning against it.”
why wouldn't they? because you've decided they wouldn't? and your other point is apocraphal and just strengthens the fact that lots of people don't like it
Yes, the outrage factory has its reach, no doubt. ~~I can't find the post right now, but I believe~~ @StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website had a rundown of viewing figures that indicated a rather different result than people downvoting it online.
Edit: found the comment thread
where is the run down? I just see opinion?
oh I see you mean the comment above, unfortunately there isn't really much there apart from a certainty of review bombing without any proof. how does anyone know that these aren't actual reviews? I know it's hard sometimes when people don't like the thing you like but no need for conspiracy theories without proof
Sample review:
Strong incel keyboard warrior energy in that "review".
90% of bad reviews I’ve seen online have been from people who were saying it was shit before it first aired and then talking about not watching it