META:’s New Look + Comment Etiquette Guidelines

We’ve been wanting to update this site’s look and features for some time. Over the past several years, we have slowly added new features to make your user experience better. Today, we introduce one of our biggest yet: a total overhaul of the website’s look with lots of bonus features.

Comment Etiquette – use it!

TrekMovie has a strong community, which lives in our lively comments section. We LOVE all of the participation that we get from you guys — it far exceeds anything we’ve seen on any other news site — and we encourage it. However, there are some people who make the experience less than pleasant for others.

Here at TrekMovie, we live by the mantra of IDIC – Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.

To encourage a more welcoming and safe environment for our readers, commenters, and writers, here we provide some guidelines for comment etiquette.

Do not do these things:

  • Attack, put down, harass, insult, or otherwise pick on other commenters, writers, or people in general
  • Use derogatory or overly explicit language
  • Ask for up/down-votes or engage in voting manipulation (including the creation of multiple accounts to avoid following the rules)
  • Post NSFW content
  • Provide personal information (e.g. address, phone number) of yourself or someone else
  • Be a dick (Wheaton’s Law).

Do do these things:

  • Post comments about the article itself
  • Express opinions on Star Trek
  • Say nice things
  • Post cool pictures (did you notice you can comment with PHOTOS now?!)


With the recent upvote/downvote system activated on the site’s comments boards, we thought it prudent to provide some guidelines on how those buttons are intended to be used. Here at TrekMovie, we follow the reddit approach to voting.

You should upvote someone when:

  • The commenter has contributed something interesting or new to the discussion
  • You enjoyed reading a comment because it made you laugh or cry or think or…
  • You think more people should read the comment

You should downvote someone when:

  • They have commented something offensive or inappropriate
  • They have commented something that does not contribute to the discussion

You should NOT downvote someone simply because:

  • They comment something you disagree with
  • You have a personal dislike for the commenter
  • You forgot to follow Wheaton’s Law

Why was my comment deleted?

If you do not follow the guidelines here, your comment may be deleted by a moderator. If a commenter continually chooses to ignore these guidelines, the moderators are not above permanently banning that person if it means making the TrekMovie comments a safer place. It can sometimes be tricky for moderators to decide whether or not a comment should be allowed or deleted. We want to encourage as much discussion as possible, and that includes negative opinions or harsh criticisms. But, if we decide that a comment adds nothing to the discussion beyond insulting a particular person or group, it will be deleted.

We <3 The TrekMovie Community

The community here on the TrekMovie comment boards is like this living organism that no one intended to create. YOU GUYS are the ones who, over its 10 year history, have made TrekMovie such a vibrant place to be, and the staff here value your contributions. This website is a volunteer effort. We are passionate about Trek, and it continues to be our absolute pleasure to bring you the news. So, thanks to all of our readers, old and new!

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Far out!

Like the look. However, I miss the display of the number of comments for each story on the home page. That was my way of determining if there has been any new activity in the comments. Now, I have to open the story to see what the tally is.


I would like to second both points. The new look is rather spiffy, but I too miss the comment tally on the main page. Not only do we now need to open the post to see the tally, but we have to scroll to the bottom of the article.
(I know – I’m an ungrateful wretch, focusing on a tiny flaw. But it’s the only flaw I really see. And, to paraphrase a certain half-human/half-alien, who I only half-understood a half-century ago, “If I seem insensitive […] it’s the way I am.”)

I doubt that is accidental but by design to get more views.

I agree with Lostrod. It’s a minor thing to lose if works out that way, but I did use it in the same manner.

And you could always tell when Bob Orci commented as the comment counter would generally explode. ;)

Seriously. Removing the comments tally is a major downgrade in user-friendliness.

I’ve already expressed my opinion about the problems with the new layout and up/down voting system (like it being anonymous and not requiring a log-in). Obviously you guys don’t care, as you just resumed it with no change. But, being that there’s no way for you to enforce how people use/abuse it, I would hope that you would not selectively enforce the other rules, like forbidding people asking for up/down votes. If someone appears to be downvoted for the verboten reasons, you can’t blame them for complaining. I don’t downvote anybody, as I object to the whole system. I’m just pointing out a loophole.

@Cygnus – the voting is basically a joke anyway. Its pretty clear that its used in the way the admins said not to. Maybe that will change now. But there are other reasons. Short, one line posts are easier to “vote” on because its easier to read then longer posts. Some posts contain multiple ideas or remarks so you might wish to vote up for one and down for another.

The way I look at it, the voting means nothing anyway. If someone agrees or disagrees strongly enough, the will post a reply. If they don’t, then they didn’t feel that strongly so who cares what their opinion is.

I’ve had posts with lots of ups and a few with lots of downs. Neither mean anything to me.

Just enjoy the discussion and ignore the votes. Although if we had a “vote” on the voting, I’d probably vote to disable it for the reason that it doesn’t mean much. On the other hand, the few posters who go absolutely insane over their down votes is hilarious enough to warrant keeping the function. But I guess that not a nice thought in the brave new world ;-)

Hi Lostrod,

Thanks for bringing this up. It’s something we are aware of and are moving to re-implement!


Thanks, Kayla and the rest of the gang!

Hi to all! I’ve delved into the PHP code and have set it so that the number of comments is displayed on the home page and on the post page. If you click it, just like on the old site, it’ll take you to the comments section directly.

I saw that. Thanks!

Thanks, Kayla. I have always found the number counter useful in knowing whether or not there’s something new to read.

Click bait…

* [Do not] Attack, put down, harass, insult, or otherwise pick on other commenters, writers, or people in general

Including, I hope, the poor people working on the show. (To a reasonable extent.)

I don’t care how much anyone hated the last few series or movies: Rick Berman, Brannon Braga, J.J. Abrams, and Bob Orci are real, breathing human being and should be treated as such. Pick on the work all you want, even say you don’t want to see more work from them, but remember that, much like Ben Sisko, they are “neither the enemy nor the Devil.” Not saying anyone can’t criticize: Just don’t be a jerk about it. (See Wheaton’s Law above.) ;-)

And, yes, that means Bob Orci has to behave too, even if people are picking on his work. ;-) (Miss seeing you in the comments, Bob.)

It would be really nice to see TrekMovie return to being a place where the fans and the creators can interact civilly. Or even just the fans and the fans for that matter. :-\ Hope it works out!

The rules stated above means EVERYONE must adhere to them, no exceptions. That includes anyone associated with making Star Trek. There have been a number of occasions in the past where a certain writer/producer of Trek would crap all over everybody here, using foul language and viciously attacking individuals, and the people running this site did nothing to stop it. That won’t be allowed anymore, right?

Well said.

To be fair, Bob has been more or less a joy here for quite some time. And I wouldn’t even fault this site for giving him more leeway than most given his status. In a way, allowing a writer/producer to say what he wants even if it violates the spirit of the rules is more telling and relevant.

The admins have been quite willing to allow posters who feel offended by that to respond. So all is fair. But again, water under the bridge. No need to complain about what WAS, just embrace what IS.

Agreed !!!

The moderators may not have done anything to stop a certain writer making comments that offended some. At the same time, the moderators did not do anything to stop certain posters from making rude and provocative posts to or about the writer. So I think – all’s fair.

That certain writer has a long history of treating people like dirt online, not just on this board. So don’t play the violin for him–he was the aggressor.

Not that I have seen. Bob Orci has been the subject of very rude and provocative posts and the same goes for what I saw on Twitter. Yes, according to some people, because he’s a big wig writer, he’s supposed to “above it all” “be better”.

I like how Kirk behaves – as in, if he is not prepared to do/be, then he doesn’t expect others to do or be whatever. I think the same should apply to Bob’s critics, some of whom, have been obnoxious.

Let’s not bring his name into it. I purposely didn’t, out of respect for the new rules.

@Keachick – let’s not get crazy lol. You have to admit Bob has, at times, been very negative towards posters here in such a way that it would likely violate the terms of use detailed in this thread

As I recall, those instances were in response to individuals crapping all over the professional and his work. If you dish it out, be prepared to take it as well. it’s really is as simple as the golden rule…do unto others…

I must disagree in the strongest possible terms to the advent of broader censorship on this board. The internet may be a cesspool in general, and I can feel the need to try and put us on notice. However this site has been a refuge for Trek fans of all opinions. Moderators can moderate as necessary for clearly abusive content, but it appears that these new rules in particular are looking to make this site a propaganda conduit. To hide and ban those who do not tow the company line is a bridge too far.

Hi Mac,

Nowhere in this post does it say we will impose broader censorship. In fact, we point out that the only comments we will remove are those that are abusive. I even directly addressed this issue in the “Why was my comment deleted” section to assuage the fears some might have that we would remove comments we disagree with. ON THE CONTRARY, it is clearly stated that users should not downvote comments just because they disagree with them, and we would apply the same logic to moderating posts.

I appreciate you bringing up this point so that I have the opportunity to reassure you that we value varying and differing opinions on all things! Often, it’s what makes discussions interesting.

Nothing but respect for your stated goals. I just hope that it remains a safe place for all opinions. Only and I mean ONLY abusive attacks about other posters or persons should be moderated.

Common sense can rule the day. We all know the posts and posters who need some guidance. And hopefully that will happen now. Disagreeing is one thing. Name calling and posts that specifically attack a person have no place here. That’s not censorship, its a gift to the rest of us who enjoy discussing Star Trek.

By saying you will delete posts and ban people is by definition broad censorship. Not to quibble with who deserves it, but yes it most certainly is.

Well, no, it’s not – there has been a long standing rule here about no political talk. On occasion, a comment will reference a leader or candidate in a general fashion, and there has been some latitude on that, but when someone had drilled in on the teabagger or libtard cracks, it’s been shut down. There are different forums for that sort of thing, and even though it’s a public board, it’s privately held, and the owners can establish rules of decorum. If those rules are to onerous to someone, they don’t have to participate. Simple as that. All I’d ask is some consistence in their enforcement.

You will have to admit it appears coincidental that a site redesign and tougher comment guidelines come only 3 weeks before a rumored (no details) fan event. Paramount has a lot of money riding on this, and the press so far hasn’t been good, as you noted in the shuttlepod podcasts. Please make it clear to us that Paramount has nothing to do with this site, and you will pull no punches when it comes to asking tough questions regarding this film, it’s progress, and pressure from the power’s that be?

Paramount has never had anything to do with this site. TrekMovie is not affiliated with Paramount. It’s a fan site, and an unofficial one at that. That’s what it has always been. With all due respect, your accusations make no sense.

With all due respect, I asked that question due to the timing coincidence and how it looks. How do we know who pays the bills for this site? I respect the mods/owners, and their reply regarding their goal. It only helps the credibility and goodwill in general if we can be 100% sure that there is no quid pro quo going on. Will you deny that payola does not exist in Hollywood and the media?


IMO, these aren’t tougher comment guidelines, Comments have always been deleted here and folks have sometimes been banned. Back in the Anthony days, warnings were frequent.

No, it isn’t.

Ridiculous. A privately-run website that has rules and guidelines and a code of conduct is practicing censorship? If you see a part of those rules that seem unreasonable to you, point that out. Otherwise this is just a straw-man argument. You’re claiming things that aren’t actually said in the referenced post.

It’s their site, they have the right to kick you out if they don’t like you or feel your fostering an atmosphere that is counterproductive to what they are trying to achieve. Simple as that. if you don’t like it, it’s your right, as it is mine, to go somewhere else.

There is nothing in the new rules that would remotely indicate the moderators are “looking to make this site a propaganda conduit.” The entire set of rules can be boiled down to Bill and Ted advice: “Be excellent to each other.” There’s nothing propaganda-like about that notion.

Everything is awesome!

I would disagree. The comments section here has been as bitchy as if it were a political site, and it could use some adults in the room making sure that the kids are all behaving themselves.

Well, this wasn’t here an hour ago.

It’s a brave new world.

Love the new look. As for the guidelines, I hope that we all will adhere by them and allow everyone to have a great time discussing the one thing that we all have in common, our love for Star Trek.

All the thanks to the Trekmovie team, Kayla, Matt & Brian, for their hard work.

Well said, Ahmed. A new day here begins for all of us.

Ditto what Ahmed said about thanks to the Trekmovie team, new look, and comment guidelines.

Dig the upgrade! And I appreciate the focus on being civil as we express our views. I have been a long, long time visitor, but I post very infrequently due to the backlash that most users seem to get just for having a different opinion. So, with our renewed sense of community and thoughtful, respectful discussion, I look forward to posting more often.

Thanks to the trekmovie staff for all of their work on this site. This has been and shall remain my trek haven.

Have the Chinese put their foot down?

That made me laugh!

Looks great! I’m all for civil discourse. Bring the news.

Nice. Long time coming. At first I didn’t notice much of a change and then realized there was. I like that its subtle. Not much change which im sure everyone appreciates. But enough to update it post 2008. lol. Only thing I would suggest is change the top logo banner to something else.. maybe more modern than the old 2009 Star Trek Teaser poster. I think that is why I didn’t notice a change at first. It still felt very old.

F I N A L L Y !!! Well done, Trekmovie!

I look forward to the incessant negative stuff by a few finally being stopped through these new guidelines.

I rest my case

This isn’t about curtailing opinion, be it positive or negative. It’s about stopping the ad hominem attacks and the incessant flame wars.

Hey Brian, by the “incessant negative stuff”, I was referring to those negative attack-like posts. Sorry for not being more clear. I believe we are on the same page.

@ PS. I’ll take ‘stopping the ad hominem attacks and the incessant flame wars’ at face value. We all understand that you liking apples, and my liking oranges are a difference of opinion and is acceptable, but constantly berating someone for that difference isn’t. We shall see..

Agreed Phil. Our community here can only hope that that dude who labels himself with three capital initials will obey the new rules. I am hoping for the best.

@ Prodigal Son: On April 29 9:46 pm you talked about stopping “those negative attack-like posts”. And yet, just 3 hours later (April 30 12:58 am), there you are attacking another poster because you don’t expect him to follow the rules. I think the whole idea of the guidelines is to steer the comments towards discussing the opinions that (hopefully) relate to the article and NOT just discuss the people posting them.

I have no expectation that the triple initialed individual referenced will be following the rules, either. So, like I said, we shall see.

@Phil – couldn’t even go one day without going after me Sadly you missed the point. As others here have asked you guys to curtail the nonsense and you’ve opted to ignore, this redesign and the tightening of moderation should have been a stronger message.

If you have a valid opinion, surely you are able to articulate it. You and your pal are both seemingly articulate. But you can stop your harassment and insults anytime. Its still amusing, especially as you completely ignored the wonderful site admins but rather silly. Wont you pledge to knock it off?

Well, TUP, you haven’t missed a beat, either. It’s a shame you just chose to skip past the comment etiquette section, so we’ll just need to see how this plays out.

@TUP, the way you’re saying “you guys” is amusing. Because you are not separate from them in the way you’ve accused others of “going after you” and attacking you.

Gawd. Howzabout EVERYBODY knock it off. Including TUP.


Incorrect. My post there was basically a plea for that dude to join us and obey the rules. That’s all. Relax, my friend.

I’ve been asking you and Phil to stop for ages and you still haven’t. Next time you issue a plea for decorum and good sense, be sure to staring into a mirror!

Well, it appears we have are answer. Same shit, different day.

@Diginon – Agreed. And thanks. Prodigal and Phil have been outrageous in their behaviour the last little while and to basically thumb their noses at the admins is simply uncalled for. I’ve been calling on them for quite some time to knock it off.

I think we can consider the past water under the bridge and I will forgo any apologies owed to me. Move on, and knock off the nonsense.


As part of the new rules, you also need to adhere to Wheaton’s Law now. You just violated it, but I’ll ignore that given you are still digesting the new paradigm here.

@Prodigal – and where we go. This site hasn’t been changed long and you guys are posting about ME. Please, knock it off. I don’t want to see anyone booted from the site. But your attacks, insults and bullying are very tiresome to the rest of his who have to wade through the crap to get to the good stuff.

You’ve been given direction. Govern yourselves accordingly.

And there you go, violating Wheaton’s Law AGAIN.

Dude, read and obey the new rules and you will find that people will be so much less antagonistic with you.

It’s a new day here – as I said originally, I am hoping for the best that you can make this site better with all of us?

Well, détente didn’t last long. Such a shame.

I can post pictures now? Cool. Let’s see. I use the use the phone, then hit the little picture of what cameras looked like 20 years ago, then I hit this–

Oh, crap! Nonononono. Where’s erase on this fool thing? How embarrassin’…

Love the update!

The rules seem straight forward. No censorship, but a swift spank to the heiny if one is abusive. Got it. (Is there an edit function for those of us who are pathological typo makers?)

Sadly, no, there still doesn’t appear to be an edit function. Frankly, I’d much rather have that than the up- and down-voting, which really serves no purpose.

Hope you don’t mind that I up-voted the idea of an Edit function. [grin]

You may just have me cast my first vote, an upvote, in favour of this site providing an Edit function. However, I have not, no need because I have said it.

So the article said not to use derogatory language… but then said “Do do” in the very next section. Contradiction..?

I think that’s only derogatory language if it’s followed by a noun such as “head”. Otherwise, I think it’s “go out and do do that voodoo that you do so well.”

I’m glad to hear the site will be tightening up commenting guidelines. I wouldn’t call it censorship, as I’ve seen from a post below. Its called maintaining decency, courtesy while also engaging in spirited discussions.

Agreed. The posts where people admitted they only posted to attack or insult people or vowed to continue to do so were really tiresome. It does explain why that was allowed to go on as the new site and tighter rules were forthcoming. This is a great community with some really insightful people. No need to let a few hurt the experience for the rest.

@ Trekmovie

Hey Brian, Kayla,

So I believe a couple of years back that this site was kind of on life support by you volunteers, and it seemed like Anthony Pascale had done the original site registration, but he kind of nearly disappeared from the face of the earth (I recall one of you at Trekmovie mentioning that you even tried to stop by his house in SoCal, but no one was there). Is the site now managed by the two of you, or does someone own the site? Just curious as to how the site is run these days?


Kayla, myself, Jared, and Matt are currently minding the store and have editorial control of TrekMovie, but Tony still owns it.

Yeah, I was wondering about that as well. While I’ve moderated a couple of sites in the past, usually a software upgrade had some cost associated to it – if you guys ponied up for that, thanks…if it’s open source, thanks again, at least according to my kid who’s the software junkie sometimes getting open source serviced can be a chore.
Related question – are you still accepting content contributions from outside your regular sources?

Hello, Kayla
My problem is that I don’t seem to be able to get to a thread I am interested in, read the associated article, read any comments and make a comment if I wish. I found myself here on this thread without intending to be. I made a comment on another thread where Patrick Stewart quoted Brent Spiner which seemed to go through and then disappeared. I was simply noting that what Brent Spiner said was rather funny.
Is the site, as in every thread, fully up and running (if you know what I mean)?

Perhaps this new software does not allow each post to have its own number. It was easier to refer to what a poster was saying when you could also use the number on that particular post, so that other readers could also identify what your own response was relating to. I guess having the reply button does solves to a greater degree. However, because anyone can click on any reply, it has often that the flow of “conversation” goes awry, unless the reader is taking careful note of the date and time of the preceding posts.
Also, just to note, I have not and will not click on either an up vote or a down vote.

It does appear that a reply to a particular post will nest (or collate) under the post being replied to. Other then that, it does seem to be pretty intuitive. It sounds like there is still an ability to tweak things on the admins side, hence a comments page here for suggestions.

There are comment “numbers,” but they’re not directly visible. Each comment has an ID tag or permalink, if you want to link to a specific comment, which you can see in a tooltip that pop up if you click on the chain icon next to the comment post date, top right. Not sure how well this will work on mobile devices, but at least for desktop users it’s convenient.


My one request is more space between the Down Vote and Reply buttons.

So say we all.

A most appealing development. I like your new appearance and features. Another great reason to visit TrekMovie.

This site needs far less moderation, I’ve posted a lot of hilarious comments on this site in the past five years only to have them removed for absolutely no reason – meanwhile I see a lot of Cheeto-dust-encrusted, very dull people carry on the most banal discussions. Wasted energy guys. I suggest you move to using Disqus (great platform) and just let people say what they want to say. Trek is all about openness and accepting different kinds of people after all.

Hi Son of Shaft,

As we’ve made clear in the past, comments are sometimes automatically held for moderation. This does NOT mean you are being “censored”. It means the system automatically flagged your comment, and, if appropriate, it will appear as soon as one of us approves it.

Check out our page about comments for more info.

By the way, we are using Disqus!

@Kayla, We are using Disqus? I’m puzzled bc Disqus allows for a picture identifier for each poster, and allows user edits (which I would love, SO MUCH, and might permit our more hot-headed commenters to see it in print and go, “WHOA that’s offensive, I better edit and tone it down.”.

Picture IDs would make it much easier for us to see if people have replied to our posts (pics are more easily identifiable when scrolling).

And I think the “nesting under previous comments” works a little more consistently …. just based on my previous Disqus experience.

I really dislike the up/down votes; they seem to stoke resentment among some users. I know you are doing your best to monitor our goings-on, but it seems they just make your jobs harder. I’m wondering why they are even there, maybe to track site traffic?

Thanks for stating guidelines, especially the Wil Wheaton dictum :-) This is something I have longed for.

Ideas of hilarious, inoffensive, and so on vary for each of us, and I hope that the ideals you’ve outlined can be consistent so that, over time, we “get” it.

Again, my hat’s off to you who care for this site purely for the love of Trek, or for us nerds, or both.

I like the idea of an Edit function because we all make typos and many of us have replied emotionally and as you said, decided after hitting submit that we should tone it down…lol However, my only concern with edit is if someone posts something and it generates several replies and the original poster goes back and edits his first post…changing the context or content.

‘it generates several replies and the original poster goes back and edits his first post…changing the context or content”
Good point. I have seen this occur on the IMDb messaging boards sometimes… I did propose, a while back, the idea of a time limit being imposed on when a poster can make changes or delete a post, like 24 hours. I don’t know just how workable that would be though, but it may counter what TUP has pointed out.

@Keachick – even an hour would be sufficient. Five minutes would be enough time to correct typos or cool off a heated post. Sober second thought etc

No, I think that 24 hours is better. I think it is more likely that people will come here, read and post and go on with other activities that need doing. When they have a chance later on, they may check in. That’s when they will have a chance to see what they’ve written and decide if a revision of a post is in order. They will have time to make the changes if they want. It can be several hours before I come back. I suspect it may be the same for others as well. Also I share the computer I am using.

I wonder what’ll happen if we put a picture link there?

This comment section doesn’t seem to work like Disqus. The “regular” Disqus template, such as one would find on AICN would be an even better approach.

Maybe I will post more often here if the new rules apply.

I like the new looks, the voting system, the guidlines. Everything. Thanks to everyone who contributed to it.

Love the new look. Thank you Kayla et al.

‘Do not attack, put down, harass, insult, or otherwise pick on other commenters, writers, or people in general.’

I agree. We all get over-emotional sometimes, but if you don’t want the above to happen, why implement up- and down-voting? Everyone with any common sense should know that it won’t be used for recommendations and will generally be used by people to try to shut down someone who dares to say something outside the ‘norm’ of opinion.

It’s like when I gave ‘Terminator: Genisys’ a decent rating on Amazon, saying that within the context of its ambitions, it succeeds pretty well and I thought it was an interesting idea that, if people are travelling back and forth in time constantly, changes would continually slip in as the events repeat themselves, BUT it’s in no way a success if looked at as a follow up to Terminator 2. Loads of people down-voted me, probably based on the first line where I said it was better than I expected!

If you say something vaguely controversial, the voting system is inevitably going to be used as a weapon and hinder any subsequent discussion, putting the original posters on the defensive and, perhaps, in the long run, putting people off posting at all.

So, I like the new look, but the voting is something with which I’m very uncomfortable.

I agree wholeheartedly. Hopefully everyone does.

As I usually browse the site from my phone, I noticed the upgrade immediately. I had recently thought about posting a suggestion to improve the mobile experience, and now you have. Thank you.

– Harry

So let me get this straight…

We can upvote a comment we liked, but we aren’t allowed to downvote a comment we didn’t like…


As the article stated, the point of an upvote is not to indicate “liking” or agreement, but whether you thought it contributed to the discussion and/or was worthy of more attention. And downvotes are for comments which are abusive, off-topic, or otherwise don’t contribute to the discussion, and are unworthy of more attention. In theory you could (and should!) upvote someone who offers a spirited, but respectful counter-argument to something you post.

Not necessarily….
If you posted ‘I like apples, and don’t like oranges’, I would not downvote you if I like oranges. If you posted ‘I like apples and anyone who likes oranges is an intellectually inferior fool’, then I’d downvote you for posting something inappropriate or offensive’.
Personally, I don’t like the up/down vote, and generally don’t participate in it. When I make an exception, I’ll post to that effect. Individuals are free to do what they like, but putting some rules around it will hopefully cut down on the abuse that was occurring.

That’s not at all what they said, Numenosium. Honestly, some people here seem determined to misinterpret everything in order to pick a fight. No one has any control over what you up- or down-vote, so there’s no such thing as “aren’t allowed to” when it comes to voting. They’re simply saying not to be a dick when doing the voting. That was patently obvious from what was posted.

Nicely done! A revamp was due, I’m specially grateful for having at last a good responsive design to navigate the site from the mobile. Good job, guys, you are miracle workers!

The look is nice!

I’m not a huge fan, however, of the coddling of emotionally immature individuals. There will, unfortunately, always be trolls & unhappy grouches. That doesn’t excuse people from putting on their “big boy pants”, toughen up & ignore those who would attempt to bring others down. We don’t need someone ‘legislating’ our behavior. What we need is for people to be a little less thin-skinned and it would nice if the people at Trekmovie would encourage more mature behavior…not infringe on people’s rights to express themselves.

The moderators are not infringing on anyone’s rights to express themselves. This site, as with others, has always had a policy of not allowing people to use swear words or for posters to go off on a big tangent about politics or other, because a) swearing is not nice or helpful and b) this site is dedicated to things Star Trek and not about the present state of US (or any other nations’) politics, medicine… Occasionally, a discussion may segue into some aspect of politics/other, but is curtailed often by the posters themselves.

You mean like calling some a D***a**? ;-) lol


You just violated Wheaton’s Law for a 3rd time today.

While not explicit in the new rules, I have no doubt that the mods are aware of your continued denigration of Keachick, and one would assume that they are now going to be much less tolerant of that bullying sort of behavior.

It was a joke Progidal. But I missed when you were appointed moderator. Geeeeeeze lol

“not infringe on people’s rights to express themselves”

Numenosium, “people’s rights to express themselves” are entirely irrelevant since this doesn’t involve the government, which is what freedom of expression is about. This is a privately owned entity, and it is entirely THEIR right to allow or not allow posts. You have a right to express yourself in public without the government stopping you. You DON’T have a right to express yourself on someone’s website forum without them stopping you–it’s entirely their call, not yours, since you’re a guest on their property. You’re entirely misunderstanding what “freedom of expression” and “infringe” mean. I suggest looking up the terms.

“Infringe” is an especially absurd term to use. It implies that this site somehow owes the posters here anything, or that people have a right to post on a website they don’t own. It does not, and they do not. We are all TrekMovie’s guests, subject to their rules. It’s as simple as that. They have every right to ban anyone they wish, or to remove any comments they wish, without having to explain themselves.


In reply to your comment:

But it does conduct commerce, albeit limited, in the U.S. and operate across States’ borders, which brings the operation under Federal jurisdiction and its Interstate Commerce arm. While as a U.S. Citizen, A. Pascal enjoys freedom of expression which includes the right to act arbitrarily, I’m fairly sure that only extends in this particular enterprise to as far as he does not violate other people’s Constitutional rights. So I’d be very surprised if he could, indeed, ban anyone, as you suggest, for “any” reason which would include the violation of their Constitutional rights not to be discriminated against because of their race, color or creed for example.

OK. That really has nothing to do with what I said, though, since I wasn’t talking about discrimination, which is a separate issue in terms of rights. I was talking about freedom of expression, which is what the other person was claiming was being infringed–which is clearly not the case. I said that no one has a guaranteed right to post a comment on a privately run message board, and that is true. The moderators have the right to delete any comments they see fit. Freedom of expression doesn’t apply here.


You said, “They have every right to ban anyone they wish, or to remove any comments they wish, without having to explain themselves.”

I was just offering one exception where they might have to explain themselves, i.e. in a court of law litigating discrimination.

As for free speech, I suppose what you say, all hinges on what the courts believe constitutes a public forum on the internet which I don’t believe has happened yet in case law? I recall they had a test for whether a real world mall, galleria or shopping center constituted one.

I get what you’re saying, Disinvited, and agree with it.

Really, I was just countering Numenosium’s comment that TrekMovie is somehow infringing on people’s rights to express themselves, which is a ridiculous claim.

Not sure if others have mentioned this. When I call up a post in Chrome, there is a huge blank space at the top of the page. The content begins down near the bottom of the screen.

Some ideas on finding your previous post and replying to specific posts …


SO, DIRECT COMMENTS @ (name, time stamp; e.g., @Commodore Wesley, 8:01 pm)

If the discussion goes more than a day consider putting the date on your comment to a specific poster’s remark.

Also, that link thing just takes me to the article, not to a specific comment. I do use a smartphone most of the time.

It’d be great if site mods can implement a “jump to bottom” function for pages in this format, too — “No need for endless scrolling! It’s fast, it’s easy, and you can pick up on the latest in the thread!”

Is this terribly lazy of me? ;-)

@Marja – I agree it can be a bit tiresome to look for latest posts since they might be hidden in the replies of much older “main” posts. But you will just have to visit here more frequently! lol

WOWZER — Count me in!

Will there be as much censorship as was previously demonstrated on the old comments section?

Prodigal, TUP, and Phil –

ENOUGH. No one here is remotely interested in watching you snipe at one another. Stop it.

We institute new guidelines and THIS is how you respond?

I agree brian. What is someone to do when they are continually attacked unchecked? I came to this thread to see Those guys (and one girl) all mentioned me. Enough is enough. I’ll defer to your guidance at this point.

Brian – I just scrolled further down and see even more posts from those guys directed to me. I have no problem replying to them but I imagine that is not what you and the other mods want and quite frankly many people here have spoken about their annoyance at wading through it.

When is enough enough?


I suggest that you don’t start any fights, to move on as well. Seriously dude, you guys acting like kids. Just move on, talk about Trek like you always do.

I agree with Ahmed. Time to move on. You guys all have smart, interesting views on Trek, but you waste an enormous amount of time attacking each other because you disagree. It has to stop. Agree to disagree. No meaningful dialogue can be had when the gist of the conversation is people hurling insults, both direct and indirect, at each other.

@Ahned – thanks. You made several points that needed to be made before I came along. And you made them probably much more fair than I would have lol Good to see everyone willing to pay nicely.

Brian is correct of course.


Thanks for agreeing to play nicely. Much appreciated. Let’s you, Phil, Keachick and I mark this day as a FRESH START please.

@ Brian

Thanks for making this happen!

TUP, arguing with the moderator is not a wise move, dude. I highly recommend moving along.

@Dandru – not arguing with the Moderate, dude. And surprised you’d see it that way.

As far as I can tell, the females who have posted on this thread have been me, Marja, TrekMadeMeWonder and Kayla Lacovino. None of these women mentioned you at all and have not attacked you in any way. I did have, what I thought, was a considered and considerate conversation with you over how the inclusion of an Edit function might work on this site. I assume that the “one girl” was a reference to me.

Brian, my response to you is simple (no whining treatise with excuses from me): you are correct and I will comply.

Brian.. I had a substantial reply in mind, but it comes down to this. The author of ‘intellectually inferior’ and countless other barbs aimed at numerous other posters is hiding behind your post, telling others how to behave. Let that sink in for a bit…

I own my comments, even those pointing out when someone is out of line, rude, condescending, or just outright obnoxious. And when I’m out of line, I say so and make the appropriate amends. This is your site, to be moderated as you see fit, and there is nothing onerous about the new posting guidelines. I will submit for your consideration, though, that the weed in your garden is the individual who is unapologetic for ‘intellectually inferior’. How that will be dealt with is up to you.

“I will submit for your consideration, though, that the weed in your garden is the individual who is unapologetic for ‘intellectually inferior’.”

Well, perhaps you also need to look at your own comments as well?

Just one example here:

April 19, 2016 1:54 pm

TUP – focus. Support your blathering statement instead of deflecting….again, or just shut up. You embarrass yourself.
Cut me some slack, you say? If you’re feeling that cocky and this is your best shot at a witty comeback, you should be checking your underwear for a yellow stain, as you’ve left plenty of stupidity on these pages that I could rip you to shreds over.

This is getting way too personal & too nasty. Time to MOVE ON for all of you.

@ Ahmed

Then why don’t you move on then…2 posts now from you here in response to Brian’s post that was directed specifically and Phil, TUP and I, including now your obvious slap at Phil to embarrass him in his response to Brian.

Phil, TUP and I each responded to Brian and are ready to move on now…I’m not sure what value your posts are providing here other than “showmanship” to gain favor with the mods? :-)

@Prodigal Son,

“and are ready to move on now”

Then get moving before you miss the train!

comment image

That’s a beautiful pic. Could watch that for a long time.

First – yes, again in agreement for some civility. The last time we agreed, the triple initialed one saw fit to pile on. If you take a look at the numerous other posters who have been on the receiving end of unwarranted barbs from the individual in question, there seems to be almost universal agreement on that.
Second – dissecting a post to slur someone serves no purpose. Grab any random thread where someone has snapped back, and the TIO is at the top of the thread. The most important thing I said in the post above is ‘And when I’m out of line, I say so and make the appropriate amends’…which is something I’ll never hear from an individual who feels he’s owed an apology whenever someone points this out. To that end I stand by my comment. If TUP wants civility, he needs to be civil, and it will be reciprocated in kind. The ball has always been in his court.


I think that everyone needs to take a step back & look at their own actions, not just the actions of the others. Since all of you are willing to have a more civil discourse, that’s a good start.

@Ahmed …Well, everyone means everyone, and so far I only see a 67% participation rate. So, again, we shall see where this goes. I see your suggestion to ‘not start fights’ apparently went unacknowledged….or was just ignored.

Well, the participation rate seems to be stuck at 67%……
Crickets are chirping.


Agreed. Enough with the “the triple initialed individual” & “dude who labels himself with three capital initials” and all the other nonsense. I suggest that if anyone made another uncivil comment after this, that they get a warning.

Time to move on, people.

Well said, Ahmed.

What does NSFW mean? It appears in the list of “Do not do…”.

NSFW is Not Safe For Work. Used to warn people using work computers not to click a link that might include adult content that would be inappropriate for work. Ie nudity

I minus vote for answering the question accurately. Hmmmmmm lol

Not Safe For Work


NSFW= Not Safe For Work. Or just don’t watch ‘This Ain’t Star Trek XXX’ at work!

“Not safe for work.”

Nice Smile From Worf

Does this mean conservatives will continue to be banned for the kind of cracks that liberals here make every day?

@Witzend – as a more conservative leaning person I haven’t noticed any of this. But Im also a social liberal so perhaps you’re noticing things that only the far right would be offended by. I haven’t noticed it at all. And Star Trek should speak to all people regardless of politics. Although isn’t the Federation sort of a communist design?

See, that’s just asking to get in trouble with the moderators. I’ve never once seen ANY evidence that the mods ban anyone based on their political leanings. It’s an unsupportable claim.


No one was banned because of their political affiliations. The few individuals who were banned in the past, that was mostly for sockpuppeting, or impersonating celebrities like Roberto Orci & James Cawley, and for their extreme behaviors.


The website seems to be a bit cranky at the moment.

Apparently your redesign and comment etiquette guidelines have not gone unnoticed. This was posted not long ago on the IMDb Star Trek Beyond message board.
“In the last week both Trekcore and Trekmovie have been redesigned. Trekmovie in particular to quash negative comments and keep posters in line.”

I wrote this response to the above two hours ago –
“Trekmovie have been looking at redesigning the site for a while. Besides, it is not a massive redesign. The positive and negative comments are flowing freely as they always have done. However, there has been a lot of sniping, posters making insulting and personal comments to other posters and that is what the moderators want to see stop, hence the moderators’ posting of guidelines, which many posters have already commented on. Most posters are happy with the guidelines and one or two felt that they couldn’t come soon enough.”

It seems that the conspiracy theorists are getting anxious, believing that Paramount are behind all this and want to shut down constructive discussion about the upcoming Star Trek movie etc. I take it that there is no credence in this belief apparently held by some people.

Keachick, indeed. I am shocked that we have to tell anyone flat out that we are in no way affiliated with Paramount, CBS, or anyone… it’s in the disclaimer on the bottom of our site and, frankly, pretty obvious.

Why on earth would any intelligent person think these sites are conspiring with the studio to present a positive impression of the film projects. Any studio that did that would be the laughing stock and in todays social media age, it would not go unnoticed.

This site more than the others has presented a very “negative” (terrible word) impression of STID and the studio’s efforts thus far with STB. Perhaps negative is the wrong word. Whats the opposite of beloved lol


“This site more than the others has presented a very “negative” (terrible word) impression of STID and the studio’s efforts thus far with STB.”

I don’t think that Trekmovie is presenting negative coverage, they are simply stating the facts & questioning the lack of a robust marketing campaign, a sentiment shared by other Trek sites like TrekCore as well as the trade sites such as Deadline & THR.

Agreed, Ahmed that comment was off base; and I fail to see any humor in it as well? IDIC though.

Unfortunately, you misunderstood the comment.

@Ahmed – what i mean is, they allow a lot of discussion that isn’t favorable to the films or the studio. And there are a lot of intelligent people here that discuss the films and other projects to a deeper degree that leads to both positive and negative perspectives.

“Why on earth would any intelligent person think these sites are conspiring with the studio to present a positive impression of the film projects.”

Your question contains the answer–no intelligent person would.


Because there are sites, not saying TREKMOVIE’s one, that provide made to order reviews that the studios do use and it’s well known since I was a lad that the studios use paid shills to goose their advertising and pther’s independent polls, and when they get caught they settle out of court never admitting wrongdoing. In the most memorable one to date Sony decided to eliminate the middleman:

”Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc. has agreed to pay the state $326,000 for using fake reviews attributed to a Connecticut newspaper in promoting its films.

Sony also has agreed to stop fabricating movie reviews, and to stop using ads in which Sony employees pose as moviegoers praising films they have just seen, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said Tuesday.

The state launched an investigation last June after a reporter for Newsweek challenged the authenticity of movie blurbs in Sony print ads. The reviews, said to be from film critic “David Manning” of The Ridgefield Press, praised films including “A Knight’s Tale” and “The Animal.”

Someone at Sony concocted glowing blurbs from the fictitious reviewer, a studio spokeswoman later admitted.

“What Sony did was like having a chef pose as a food critic and then give his own restaurant four stars,” said James Fleming, the state’s consumer protection commissioner.

Sony, 20th Century Fox, Artisan Entertainment and Universal Pictures later admitted using employees or actors in TV commercials purporting to feature testimonials from moviegoers.” — Sony Pays For Fake Reviews’; By Bootie Cosgrove-Mather, AP, March 12, 2002, 1:43 PM

”A judge has finalised a settlement in which film studio Sony will pay $1.5m (£850,000) to film fans after using a fake critic to praise its movies.

In 2001, ads for films including Hollow Man and A Knight’s Tale quoted praise from a reviewer called David Manning, who was exposed as being invented.

People who saw the films in the US can now get a $5 (£2.80) refund from Sony’s pay-out, lawyer Norman Blumenthal said.

Sony did not admit liability in the settlement and declined to comment.

The studio reached the out-of-court agreement to settle the case and avoid the cost and uncertainty of litigation, according to a court notice.

The settlement was agreed last year but has only just been approved by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl.” — ‘Sony pays $1.5m over fake critic’; BBC NEWS; 2005/08/03 15:57:41 GMT

It’s probably open for debate if this rises to the level of collusion or not, but intelligent people do understand that the possibility of collusion does exist. I’m no conspiracy theorist by any stretch of the imagination, but there is always wisdom in exercising a level of discernment when reading a text. There may be other motivations involved when commentary is to flowery or negative for no discernible reason.


In reply to your comment:

Well, recall the AP in 2002 said Universal, among others, also admitted to engaging in unsavory shill uses but were never taken to court over it, and then fast forward 9 years and what do we see?:

”Universal Pictures is bringing in a veteran of rival Sony Pictures to run its movie marketing department, the second change in the studio’s top executive ranks in the last month.

Josh Goldstine, a senior creative advertising executive who has worked at Sony since 1991, will soon be named president of marketing for Comcast Corp.-owned Universal, according to several knowledgeable people who requested anonymity because the appointment is not yet official. Goldstine is still under contract at Sony and is negotiating to move to Universal soon.

Goldstine has worked in Sony’s marketing department for 20 years, eventually rising to the post of president of creative marketing before being named a senior creative executive in 2008. He recently oversaw advertising campaigns for such movies as “Battle: Los Angeles” and “The Green Hornet.”

In 2001, he was suspended [30 days and then reinstated.] for his role in creating a fake film critic named David Manning whose made-up reviews for several Sony movies, including “The Animal” and “A Knight’s Tale,” were quoted in the studio’s advertisements.” — ‘Universal to tap Sony’s Josh Goldstine to run movie marketing’|May 26, 2011|By Ben Fritz, Los Angeles Times


It’s a ridiculous notion, we all know that the marketing team at Paramount is still hibernating & won’t be awaken until May 20th!

Those notions aren’t mind. I agree with you and I also suspect that Paramount will go full steam ahead with publicising STB come May 20th, with the release of the second trailer.

It would be good to hear more details about the event though. Downunder it’s already 2nd May – only a little more than two and a half weeks away from the May 20th event!

Love the new look. Great job by all involved. LLAP

Nicely done. I like the new design a lot more than the previous one. This is a much more successful redesign than that of another Trek site that was put in place around a year ago or so. That redesign made that site bizarrely slow and nearly impossible to navigate. Yours, on the other hand, is a vast improvement… though I think a lot of people would be very appreciative of an edit function, given the great number of comments to that regard.

I, for one, type extremely fast, so I’m prone to making an error or two (thankfully, not a lot… but a few do creep in). I’m also a writer by trade, though, so I cringe like hell when I later notice those errors. It would be nice to be able to tweak them when I notice that I’ve made a typo, for reasons of professional pride. Just a suggestion. :)

As part of a course I have just started doing, I was given this link to open and study.
I thought it would be appropriate to share here.

Also the comments tally is back, which means you can click straight on it and join the thread again more quickly. You can also see if any more comments have been made since last coming to the thread.

Good one, Kayla and co…:)

Don’t ◾Attack, put down, harass, insult, or otherwise pick on the writers?


To late….

As to the new look I think it looks great. Question, why do I get subscription conformation emails for every comment I make? Do they mean anything? Thanks.


@Yanks – that’s odd. I dont. Do you click the box that reads “Notify me of new replies to this comment”? I do not and I assume if I did, I would get an email every time I or someone else posted a reply… Perhaps thats it…

I do click that box because I would like to receive a notification if someone commented on my post, but I received no email regarding your post. I will not select that box this time and see if I get one of those conformation emails.

I did not get that notification/conformation email this time.

@Moderators – Is it possible to add an Edit and/or Delete function, with a time stipulation, like 12 or 24 hours? Only the posters themselves could change or delete their own posts, of course. No one else would be able to, except a moderator who may choose to delete a post they consider most inappropriate. Hopefully, moderators would not need to do that very often.

I second this.

Cant risk it. Cant have people deleting their posts, especially that long after. Would it also remove all replies? Or would replies be floating there seemingly random in what they have responded to?

Delete can be mis used and lead to people taking the temperature of the group before deleting or changing their post. That not conducive to honest and open discussion.

We have to be mature enough to stand by our words. We can admit when we’re wrong or overly hot headed, nothing wrong with that. All of us, here or in life, have had to do that. And no one should be (anymore) eating someones lunch over a typo.

TUP Today 3:19 pm

TUP makes good points there.

Well, having a delete function doesn’t inhibit “honest and open discussion”; that’s kind of a “glass half-full” viewpoint. While folks shouldn’t eat someone’s lunch over a typo, as a poster I HATE it when I screw up. It’s embarrassing to misspell words or even miss words all together and stuff like that. So the edit function, to only be open for a specified amount of time, would be nice. What’s the risk? Try it for awhile and remove it if bedlam or pandemonium set in.

I can see TUP’s point of view as well. Perhaps 24 hours is too long. Perhaps an hour would suffice in most instances. Of course, all this discussion is moot, if such software (ie putting a time restriction on how long a person has to edit and/or delete before the post stays put in the thread) is not available for the moderators to implement.

@Moderators – Is such software available? Would it be *easy* to implement, along with what is already in place? Or would it mean a redesign of the site to accommodate it? What say you?…:)
PS I like this design, by the way. Just having that extra function would be nice, but not if it is too much of a pain to implement.


(The long-timers here will get that)

I think the new design looks great, and I am happy that the moderators have laid out some pretty clear, common sense guidelines relative to posts to this site.

I can think of at least 1 other Trek site that no longer exists, and I can’t help but wonder if it was in part due to the apparent lack of any adult moderation on that site, with the result being a small group of people who loved to argue (in unrelenting post after post after post) with anyone who didn’t agree with them.

Although contentious fan debates in science fiction go back to the very beginning of the genre (see the Great Exclusion Act from the 1939 WorldCon in New York), it’d be preferable to me if everyone was just polite to one another, and would simply agree to disagree. You know: Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations!

Thank you for the new design. I expect there’ll be a LOT of Star Trek movie and TV news coming out this year!

Mashable didn’t identify it as they were required by including the following link in their article identifying the source of their graphic: