For general discussion on this episode, visit the ENT forum at The Trek BBS.
Possible Klingon MovementEdit
I watched this episode recently and I was thinking - do you think that Kolos could have started some sort of movement to make Klingons oppose the injustice in the courts? I was thinking this because of the theme running through the episode about Archer helping people and how a small number of "courageous people stood up and made a difference" - Kolos even says this at the end. Also, Worf from ST:TUC appears to share many of the same views as Kolos. I know this is pat-speculatio, but does anyone think this is worthy of some sort of note? I thought I would put it down here, first. TrekFan 19:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- Considering the themes of corruption and still very much warrior rule that play in dealings with the Klingons in TNG and DS9, coming to a head in "Tacking Into the Wind", I'd say no. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- This is the first time in the Star Trek chronology that we see painstiks.
Are we sure they're Painstiks? The ones in Judgment appeared to me to be electrical in nature while the ones in TNG looked more like heat related...so anyway...I think it should be rewritten in such a way to make them related to painstiks but possibly not painstiks. The same statement could also be made on the article painstiks. – Morder 08:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- They were painstiks. And the reference would seem to be more suited on that page, then perhaps this page. --Alan 08:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Well that's my question...how do we know? Was there a production note? – Morder 08:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Unless it's mentioned we don't...which is why you have Disruptor. The only reason I bring this up is because they're obviously different...as stated in my reasons above. (Or as Shran said...they're precursors to painstiks) – Morder 08:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but this is stupid. Questioning something that clearly dubious is one thing, but to be outright paranoid is another. They were both used to inflict pain. The only difference was special effects used... --Alan 09:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
There's no paranoia intended...but this site is full of stuff like this. My point in bringing it up is that it was not called a painstik so clearly you can't call it a painstik. I concede that they're similar in function but not the same. Since others get into arguments over stuff as trivial as this as well I don't see it as stupid at all. Clearly a rewording is in order to specify that these *may* be painstiks or early version of them. Either way I leave it to you to decide how to proceed. I'm only bringing it up. – Morder 09:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
First Contact? Edit
There's a note on the Augment Crisis that it could have been the original Klingon First Contact had the Temporal Cold War not occured. I may have missed something but why couldn't the events shown here have been the First Contact? 126.96.36.199 09:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC) (LordJuss by the way who is having trouble logging in!)
- Really...all this speculation should just be removed. For instance. This Augment Crisis could have been earlier/later than it occurred in normal timeline because of the Cold War...Just as this First Contact in Judgment maybe have never happened if not for the previous events precipitated by the Temporal Cold War...There are too many explanations that could be construed...so any explanation just doesn't belong unless it was stated in an episode. — Morder 10:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- In 'Star Trek VI', set some one hundred years after this episode, it's said that no one has ever escaped from Rura Penthe. However, Archer does just that at the end of this episode. It could be argued that "no one has ever escaped" means no one has ever escaped without outside help (as Archer did in this episode) or that the impossibility of escape is a myth perpetuated by the Klingon Empire.
Narendra III Edit
- Because that is better than the alternative of calling it "unnamed planet", as we have proof of the intent of the production. Production sources are acceptable for article title purposes only when the name is not stated in canon(such as Livingston). 31dot (talk) 03:47, January 9, 2014 (UTC)